Part 4

III. Further, there is in living beings a power that preserves the purports (or thoughts and conceptions) of what the senses had perceived, such as, for instance, that the wolf is an enemy; the child, a darling next of kin. Wherefore, so much at least if not more is evident, that this power is other than the common-sense (or picturing), inasmuch as in the latter there are no forms but such as it has gained from the senses; whereas, again, the senses did not feel the wolf’s enmity, nor the child’s love, but alone the wolf’s image, and the child’s bodily shape; and as to love and fierceness, it is the mind’s eye alone that has got them, and then stored them up in this power. It is also clear that this power is other than the imaginative power, for the reason that this last does at times imagine what is other than that which the mind’s eye has deemed right, found true, and has derived from the senses; whereas the former power, i.e., the one here dealt with, imagines none other than what the mind’s eye has deemed right, has found true, and has derived from the senses.

This power is also other than the conjecturing (surmising) power, for the reason that this last does not preserve what some other has deemed to be true, but it of its own self deems to be true, whilst the power here treated of does not itself pass judgment of truth or falsehood, but only preserves what another has deemed to be true. This power is called memory, the preserving or keeping faculty.

Again, the imaginative power is called by this name--imagination--if the conjecturing (or surmising) power alone use it: and if the speaking (rational) power use it, it is called the thinking (cogitative) power.

The heart is the source (spring) of all these powers (faculties), in Aristotle’s opinion; yet the sway over them is in different organs (instruments). Thus the sway over the outward (apparent) senses is in their known organs; whereas the sway over the picturing (representing common-sense) power is in the anterior hollow (ventricle) of the brain; the sway over the imaginative, in the middle hollow thereof; the sway over the remembering, in the posterior hollow thereof; and the sway over the conjecturing, throughout all the brain, but above all in the compartment of the imaginative within the brain [or, throughout the whole of the brain, but more especially alongside of the imaginative thereof]. And in so far as these hollows (ventricles) suffer harm and hurt, so will the manifold workings of these powers suffer also; for were they, (the powers,) standing independently, that is to say subsisting in themselves, and efficient independently, that is to say putting forth their workings of themselves, they would not need, for their proper and peculiar actions, any sort of instrument or organ: in this wise one recognizes that these powers do not subsist in themselves, but that the undying power is the Speaking (Reasoning) Soul, as we shall hereafter set forth; yet for all this, the soul does maybe at times seek out for itself after a fashion (so to speak) the purest quintessences of the kernels of these powers, and cause them to exist of themselves, the setting forth of which shall, D.v., soon follow.

* * * * *

The following is the terminology of the five inward senses:

1. Common-Sense = hiss mushtarak, mutaçawwirah.

2. Vis formans, imaginatio = khayâl, muçawwirah, fantasia, takhayyul, mutakhayyilah.

3. Vis cogitativa, vis imaginativa = mufakkirah, mutakhayyilah, mutawahhimah, zânnah, mutaçarrifah, mutafakkirah, takhayyul.

4. Memory, remembering, preserving = hâfizah, mutazhakkirah, zhâkirah, zhikr.

5. Vis existimativa, opinativa = wahm, mutawahhimah, zhânnah, takhayyul, wahmiyyah.

Here follows an attempt to clear up this bewildering subject:

1. Perception, through any one or more of the five outward senses, of the outward concrete form.

2. Conception of particular notions, over and beyond the concrete form perceived.

3. Memory, which retains both outward forms perceived as well as recalls inward particular forms conceived.

4. Common-Sense, rises a step higher than the three preceding, in that it unites two or more of the products of any of the three preceding and derives from them a new conception.

5. Opining, which rises higher still and passes judgment, or comes to a definite opinion as to the truth or falsehood of conceptions formed.

In respect of memory, Ibn Sînâ in his «Kanon» of Medicine, makes a distinction. He says: «And just here is a point for scrutiny and judgment as to whether the preserving power and the power recalling (to consciousness) such notions as had been stored up by the opining power but have passed away from it, are one power or two.»

Here follows still another attempt:

1. Perception, of the Five Senses, through organs.

2. Sway of the Common-Sense, in the anterior hollow.

3. Sway of the Imaginative Power, in the middle hollow.

4. Sway of the Remembering Power, in the posterior hollow.

5. Sway of the Conjecturing Power, throughout all the brain, and alongside of the imaginative compartment.

Number 1. has been dealt with in Section Six; number 5 belongs exclusively to Man, and will be further dealt with in the next Section; the remaining three, to wit numbers 2, 3, and 4, are in all live animals, and are dealt with in this Seventh Section. The theory is beautifully clear and simple: thus, number 2 grasps and appropriates the outward form brought to it by the senses; number 3 grasps and appropriates particular conceptions; and number 4 stores them up; thus also, the one dwelling in the front hollow is not influenced by the action of the one occupying the middle or the hindermost hollow, whereas conversely each succeeding faculty has recourse to the one preceding it in order of place. This theory arose after an acquaintance with the division and arrangement of the brain into chambers had made considerable progress with the Arabs.

Those who read German should not fail to study Dr. Samuel Landauer’s erudite notes in vol. 29 for the year 1875 of the Z.d.D.M.G.

SECTION EIGHTH

=A Sketch of the Human Soul from the Starting-Point whence it sets out until the End-Point whither it reaches its Perfection.=

No doubt that the speaking (rational) species of the [genus] animal is distinguished from the non-speaking (irrational species) by a power, through which it is enabled to imagine things rational, which power is called the speaking (rational) soul; and the custom has obtained of calling it the “hylik” mind, that is to say the potential mind, thus likening it to the hyle, which is potential matter.[J] Moreover this power is found in the whole human species; and it possesses in itself at the outset none of the mentally-grasped forms, but these arise within it after two sorts of processes: The first is through a Divine guidance, without effort of study, and without profitting from the senses, as for example the mentally-grasped self-evident axioms, like our conviction that the whole is greater than the part, and that two contradictories (contrasts) do not come together at one time in one and the same thing; so that sane-minded adults share equally in the acquisition of such forms. The second sort of process is through earning [the mental thought or truth] by reasoning process, and by array of proof and demonstration, such as the conception of logical truths, like genera, species, differentia, and properties, simple terms, and terms compounded in the various modes of compositions [of several ideas into one composite term], justly-moded syllogisms both valid and false, propositions which if moded into syllogisms lead to necessary demonstrated results, or to argumentative probable results, or to equally balanced rhetorical results, or to primary (axiomatical) sophistical results, or to impossible poetical results;[15] and such mentally-grasped forms as the recognition of the certainty of natural realities, like hyle (primitive matter) and form, privation (non-existence) and Nature, place and time, rest and motion, bulky bodies of the sky-firmament and bulky elemental bodies, absolute universal being and absolute nothingness, generation absolute and corruption absolute, origen of things generated that are within the sky, that are within the deepest depths of mines, and that are on the earth’s crust, amongst which last-named are plant and animal, the true conception “Man” and the truth of the soul’s conception of its own self; and still further such mentally-grasped forms as the conception of ideas mathematical, amongst which are number, pure geometry, stellar geometry, harmonical or musical geometry, optical geometry; and again, further still, such ideas as the conception of divine affairs, like the knowledge of the principles of the absolute self-existent in so far as he exists _per se_, and of the principles consequently adhering to him, such as potentiality, power and efficiency, first cause and accounting cause, essence and accidens, genus and species, incompatibility and homogeneity, agreement and disagreement, unity and multiplicity; and, still further, the fixing of the principles of the speculative (theoretical) sciences, amongst which are the mathematical, the natural and the logical--all which cannot be attained save through this latter science;[16] and still further, such as proving the first Creator and the first Created, the universal (generic) soul and _how_ creation came about, the relative position of mind towards creation, and the relative position of soul towards mind, the relative position of hyle towards nature, and of forms towards the soul, the relative position of the skies, orbs, planets and all existing things towards hyle and towards form, and why and wherefore they differ so widely as they do as to forwards and backwards ([Greek: proteron kai hysteron: προτερον και ὑστερον]) of development; and the knowledge of the divine government, universal nature, primal providence, prophetic inspiration, the divine holy spirit, sublime angels, attaining to the certainty of the Creator’s being beyond all partnership and similitude [i.e. recognizing the truth that polytheism and anthropomorphism, are to be rejected]; and attaining to the knowledge of what rewards await the righteous, and what punishments impend the wicked, of the delight and the pain overtaking souls after their abandoning the bodies.

Further, this power which conceives these ideas does at times gain from sense forms mental, imaginative, and innate in (instinctive to) itself; and in such a case it does this in that it lays before itself the forms that are in the conceiving power and in the remembering (preserving) power, by employing the imaginative and the conjecturing power, and then contemplates them, and finds them to have participated in some forms and to have differed in some other forms; and finds some amongst the forms that are in these powers to be essential, and others to be accidental. And as to their participation in forms, it is like the participation of the form Richard and an ass, in the conceiver’s mind, in the idea of Life; and the differing of the two in the idea of speaking (rational), and non-speaking (brute). As to the essential form, it is e.g. like the life that is in them both; as for the accidental, it is e.g. like their blackness and whiteness. So that if we find the two aforesaid on this wise--i.e., as stated,--[the mind] makes each one of these essential and accidental, participated and peculiar forms, one universal mental form singly and alone, and thus through this working-over process, it gets at mental genera, species, differentia, properties, accidens; then it combines these single notions into particular combinations; then into syllogistic argumentative combinations and deduces from them corollaries from the results--all which it gets through the service of the animal powers, with the help of universal mind, after the manner that we shall set forth later on, and through the intermediary of such necessary self-evident mental axioms as it has been endowed with.

Moreover this power, although it derives help from the sensuous power when getting out single mental forms from the sensuous forms, yet it does not need the sensuous power for conceiving these ideas (notions) within itself and for setting up syllogisms out of them, neither when affirming, nor when conceiving the two dicta [of abstraction & generalization], as we shall afterwards explain. And to whatever extent it derives sensuous corollaries, for which there shall be need, through the said working-over process, yet it dispenses with the employment of the sensuous powers, nay it is even sufficient for and in itself, for the carrying on of all its manifold activities. And just as the sensuous powers perceive solely and wholly through an assimilation of that which is felt, so also do the mental powers perceive solely through and wholly through an assimilation of the mentally-grasped; and this assimilation is the abstraction of the form from matter, and the adhering to it; only that the feeling power does not get the sensuous form through willed motion and voluntary action on its part, but through the arrival of the very thing felt unto it, either by chance or through the intermediary of the motion-promoting power, and laying bare of the forms unto it (abstraction) through the help of the media that connect the forms with it; whereas, in the case of the mental power, (Reason Understanding) this process is otherwise; for by and through itself it at times does itself perform the abstraction (laying bare) of the form from matter as often as it wills, and then clings unto it. And for this reason it is said that the sentient power is more or less passive in its conception [or, that the feeling power is after a fashion acted upon when it conceives], and that the mental (understanding) power is active; nay rather it is said, for this reason, that the sentient power cannot do without instruments (organs), and has in itself no efficiency; and how is it possible to apply such a statement (proposition) to the mental (understanding) power?

The mind (Understanding, Reason) is in fact and deed wholly and solely nothing else than the forms of mentally-grasped things, if these be arrayed in the very mind potentially, and through it they are brought out to effective action; and hence it is said that the mind is in fact and deed at once both understanding and understood. Amongst the properties of the understanding power is this, that it unifies the many and multiplies the one through analysis and synthesis. As to multiplication, it is such as the analysis of one man into essence, body, nourishment-getting, animal, speaking (rational). As to unification of the many, it is such as the composition (synthesis) of this one man out of essence, body, animal, speaking (rational) into one notion which is mankind (human being).

Moreover the mind, although it applies its activity within a duration of time in arranging syllogisms, through using reflection, yet the result itself, which this reflection obtains, and which is the fruit of thought and the end sought after, is not dependant upon time, nor is it obtained save at an instant; nay more than this, the mind itself is wholly above and beyond all time.

And the reasoning (speaking) soul, if it engages itself upon the sciences, its activity is called mind or intellect, and it is accordingly called speculative or theoretical mind: which I have already described. And if it engages itself upon overcoming blameworthy powers, that entice unto wrongdoing through their excess, unto folly through their abandonment, unto impetuosity through their agitation, unto cowardice through their indifference or lukewarmness, or unto wickedness through their excitement, or unto degeneration through their smouldering, and leads them over into the paths of wisdom, endurance, chastity--in short unto righteousness, then its activity is called ruling or governing, and it is accordingly called practical mind or reason. Again, the reasoning (speaking) power is sometimes so fitted out in a few persons through [K]vigils and conjunction with the universal mind as to be quite independent of taking refuge unto syllogistic argument and reflection, but rather is sufficiently stored with inspiration and revelation to render it wholly absolved from such ordinary means as mental ratiocination: this peculiar property of the reasoning mind is called hallowedness or sanctity, and it is accordingly called Holy Ghost. Unto such a favoured rank and degree none shall attain save prophets and apostles, upon whom be peace and blessing.

FOOTNOTES:

[J] Ibn Sînâ in his «_Kitâb-ul-Najât_» says: «Indeed it has been called «hylik» by way of likening it to primitive hylik matter, which in itself has no form at all and yet is the substratum of each and every form.»

[15] This passage as to syllogisms and conclusions may be made clearer by rendering it thus:--«which, if arranged syllogistically, allow of getting to conclusions that are (a) necessarily true and valid, viz. apodictic; (b) most always true, viz. dialectic; (c) both true and false, viz. rhetorical; (d) preponderantly false, viz. sophistical; and (e) merely false, viz. poetical.»

[16] In his «_Najât_» Ibn Sînâ says of this science:

«Logic is the theoretical speculative science that teaches out of which forms and materials there will come about satisfying argumentation, of which argumentation that which is strong, and imposes an assertion resembling certainty, is called dialectic; and that which is weak thereof, and imposes a prevailing opinion, is called rhetorical.»

His compendious Essay on Logic remains to this day one of the clearest and best that beginners can find in the Arabic language on this abstract science of the Laws of Thought.

[K] fasting, prayer, night-watchings.

SECTION NINTH

=in which the Proofs of the Essentiality of the Soul, and of Its Independence of Body in its Structure, are set forth in pursuance of the Method of Logicians.=

SUB-SECTION A:--One of the logical proofs for establishing this Claim:

Let us however first preface it with premisses, among which are:--

_First Premiss_: that man conceives universal (generic) notions wherein a greater or less multitude participates, such as man at large, and animal at large. And of these generic notions there are such as he conceives through a particular [or partial, or an obligatory] synthesis, and there are such others of these generic notions as he does not conceive by any synthesis, but singly and individually. And unless he shall have conceived the latter division (class, sett), it is not possible for him to conceive the former. Further, he conceives each one of these generic universal notions only under _one_ form, wholly stripped (abstracted) from all relationship to its concrete sensuous particulars, since the particulars of each one of the generic notions are potentially endless [in variety and number] and no one of the particulars has any right of priority over another particular in respect of that _one_ form of the generic notion.

_Second Premiss_: that a form, whatsoever body it detaches, reduces, and adorns, and in general whatsoever individual of divisible things it so takes hold of, it clothes the same and exactly fits the same in every one of its parts. And whatsoever clothes and exactly fits a divisible thing in all its parts is itself divisible; and hence every form that has clothed and exactly fitted any body whatsoever is itself divisible.

_Third Premiss_: that in every generic (universal) form, if regard be had, in the division of such form, purely and simply to its abstract self, then it will not at all validly follow that the parts into which it has been divided shall necessarily resemble the whole in its complete notion; otherwise it must follow that the generic form, whose division has been made in respect of its abstract self, has not been itself divided, but that it has been divided into its constituents, whether these be its various species or its numerous individuals, whereas multiplicity of species or of individuals does not necessarily entail division in the abstract generic notion itself. But it has been laid down as a fact that such division has actually taken place, which is a contradiction. Hence our assertion that the parts of the generic form do not resemble it in its full and complete notion is a true dictum.

_Fourth Premiss_: that in the mental form, if regard be had to its division, it will not validly follow that its parts are denuded (stripped) of the totality of its notion. This is so because, if we admit such total denudation, and assert that these parts are utterly aloof from the complete conception of the generic whole, then the form will arise, in such parts, only upon their assembling together, so that they are in fact things devoid of that form which will arise in them on their being set together, which is a quality of the parts of materia capax or passive matter which occupies space ([Greek: dektikon: δεκτικον]); [Note: The recipient is the acted upon, and it is called matter, and also place.]; and hence the division has not been effected in the generic form, but in its objective concrete materials. But it has been asserted that the division has come to pass in it: this too is a contradiction. Therefore our assertion: “It will not validly follow that its parts are stripped of the totality of its notion” is a true statement.

_Fifth Premiss_: which is the result of the two preceding: that in the generic form, if it be possible that divisibility be considered in it, then its parts are neither wholly devoid of the perfect form nor are completely exhaustive of it, and are as it were [component, constituent] parts of its definition and outline (or description).

Given then these premisses, we shall further unquestionably say that a mentally-grasped form--in short all knowledge--claims some abode somewhere, which abode is both an essence itself and a part of man’s self, so that such essence will not be devoid of being either a divisible (material) body or a non-corporeal indivisible essence. I however say, that it is not licit that it be a corporeal body; because a generic mentally-grasped form, if it abide in a body, then it is inevitably possible for divisibility to befall it, as we have shown above. Nor is it licit that its parts be otherwise than resembling the whole from one standpoint, and contrasting with it from another standpoint, in a word each one of the parts contains somewhat of the notion of the whole; whereas there is no generic form whatsoever but of whose parts a compound can be formed that is partly like it and partly unlike it save genera and differentia; consequently these parts are genera and differentia, and hence each one of them is in its turn a generic form; and thus the same assertion repeats itself as above.

Inevitably this will end in a form that is no longer divisible into genera and differentia, owing to the impracticability of progression ad infinitum into parts differing in notions, even if it be established that corporeal bodies are so divided into parts ad infinitum.