Excerpts: "
MEDIEVAL ARAB DANCE DANCE AND INTERPRETATION
of Arabic poetry"
Marialuisa Sales,
Ed. Akkuaria, 2006
(For gent.le of the Author. Author's Copyright,
Reproduction in whole or part of the text without explicit permission . To request permission to write orchestes @ gmail.com . The article is devoid of text notes original.)
Reproduction in whole or part of the text without explicit permission . To request permission to write orchestes @ gmail.com . The article is devoid of text notes original.)
The Sufi and theologian Abu Hamid Muhammad at-Tusi al-Ghazali (1058-1111) is Sunni Islam's highest authority of all time, to the extent that is allocated exclusively the honorary title of Supervisor of Islam (Hujjat al-Islam). While it is common that some Muslim scholars constitute the unquestioned authority in their specific area of \u200b\u200bresponsibility, the case of al-Ghazali is quite rare, because its authority extends to many areas. For
regard to the right, within the school SCIAF al-Ghazali is considered second only to its founder as-Shafi'i, and in the speculative theology (kalam) is one of the greatest exponents of Ash'arite. In the context of Sufism is then considered a "Pole of Time" (Qutb az-Zaman), ie, the beginning of higher rank who is living in a given period.
The literature of al-Ghazali is very wide and extended to many disciplines. His main work is Ihyā''ulūm ad-Din (The revivificazione of religious sciences), a multi-volume compendium that is considered a veritable encyclopedia of Islamic sciences. Of this al-Ghazali himself composed two synthetic summaries, one in Arabic, entitled Al-arba'īn fi usul ad-Din (The Forty principles of religion), and the other in Persian, called Kimiya-e Sa ' Adah (The Alchemy of Happiness). From this it seems appropriate to quote some passages from the chapter entitled "About the role of music and dance as the pillars of the spiritual practice." In our view, they allow you to dispel the assumption under which the Islamic jurists
would be detrimental as opposed to the use of musical instruments and dance practice.
"The Most High - says al-Ghazali - has designed the human heart so that it contains a hidden fire which is awakened by music and harmony, and that can lead man beyond by himself, in ecstasy. These harmonies are echoes of that higher world of beauty that
call the 'spirit world'. They point to man his relationship with that world, and produce in him an emotion so deep and so strange that he is not able to explain
. The effects of music and dance are more or less deep in proportion to the extent that those on whom they are acting more or less prone to movement, they flare up the fire that is dormant in the heart, regardless of whether it is a
fire sensual, or divine and spiritual. "As a result there have been many disputes among theologians about the permissibility of music and dance from the religious point of view." Here we merely asserts
that music and dance is not something external to instill in the heart, but simply to flare up emotions - albeit dormant - are already present in it. Therefore, if a man has in his heart the love of God which is required by law, it is perfectly legal, and even meritorious, that he devotes to activities that help to increase. On the contrary, if you have a heart full of desire to dominate the senses, music and dancing will only increase it, and in his case are therefore prohibited. As one who listens to music or attend the dance for the purpose of mere entertainment, music and dance in his case are neither lawful nor
prohibited, but simply indifferent. The fact that they produce pleasure is not in itself sufficient to bring prohibited. Listen to the birds singing, contemplating the green grass or a running brook that they are also activities that give pleasure, but no one ever dreamed of
and define them as prohibited. "Those who deny the reality of the ecstasies and other spiritual experiences of the Sufis do not prove that their narrow-mindedness. It should be recognized, however, some mitigating them, and as difficult to believe in the existence of states that have not experienced firsthand, as well as a blind man is difficult to contemplate that the green grass or a running brook that is pleasant or for a boy and difficult to understand the pleasure of governing. The wise man, however, despite not having experience of those states in person, you will look good and deny their reality. What folly could be greater than deny the reality of a thing for the mere fact of not having experienced
? "
So if al-Ghazali believes that music and dance, respectively, should be considered beneficial or harmful depending on the state of mind that generate the result, some lawyers rear
Hanbali school, as Ibn al-Jawzī (1116-1201) and Ibn Taymiyyah (1263-1328) are so hostile to the dance to be condemned in toto, sometimes resorting to sophistry and specious arguments of nature . 'Abd al-Rahman ibn al-Jawzī al-Baghdadi was a literalist
animated by a strong hostility to the Sufis in general and al-Ghazali, in particular, so as to write an entire treatise against him, entitled al-I'lām Ahya ' aghlāt bi-al-Ihya '(Notification of living beings
errors in the Ihya'). Should therefore not surprising that he not only condemns every kind of dance, including Sufi, but even any kind of singing, including qasīdah, that is the anthem of religious argument. In Talbīs Iblis (Lucifer's temptation) Ibn al-Jawzī says
"The hearing music and dance have two defects: first, distract the heart from the knowledge of the power of Almighty God, and encourage the other pleasures of this world and make you give free rein to the passions of the senses, including the main stimulus to the sexual union. Thus, there is a relationship between music and adultery: the music is a pleasure for the spirit, just as adultery is the greatest of pleasures for the soul desires. For this reason, lawyers close to me say that musicians and dancers are not respectable people, and consequently believe that their testimony might be used in court. Music is in fact losing to a sense of proportion and the use of reason and cause behaviors similar to those induced by the wine drunk in the spirit. For this we go
prohibited. "
continues blaming the Sufis and their dance
" When the excitement of the Sufi dance becomes more intense, one of them urges whoever is sitting next to stand with him. Under their rule, whoever receives the call can not refuse to get up. When the first rising, the others get up with him. If one of them turns his head, so do others and ceremonies of this sort supposed to worship God and to show him submissive. Then, when their excitement and became more intense, they throw their clothes to the musicians. Sometimes the whole cast, sometimes after being torn apart. " The same preconceived hostility towards music and dance, as demonstrated by Taqi al-Din Abu 'Abbas Ahmad ibn Taymiyyah al-Harran, the one that it is considered the forerunner of contemporary fundamentalist movements. While condemning the dance, Ibn Taymiyyah did not find anything untoward in resorting to an interpretation of the Koran itself very specious. Verse 37 of Surah of the Night Journey (XVII) states that: "Wa beyond tamshi fi al-ardi Marah," ie "do not walk the earth with insolence." It seems clear that the verse in question does not in itself
imposes nothing on the dance, but merely to prohibit the vainglory and the pride of those who walk ostentatiously. Ibn Taymiyyah claims, however, read this as a condemnation of the dance and - in the footsteps of Ibn al-Jawzī - explains that "dance is something relevant to this kind of arrogance." This way of arguing, which is to force the legal sources just to prove a preconceived thesis, was typical of Ibn Taymiyyah and was indeed one of the reasons that led to his sentence to life imprisonment for heresy by the emir of Damascus Ibn Qalawun. It is no coincidence that, while after his death, al-Ghazali became undisputed legal authority for the entire Islamic world, Ibn al-Jawzī instead was sidelined because of his pedantic literalism, while Ibn Taymiyyah was even imprisoned by those who feared the spread of his extremism. It 'also significant that while the connoisseur of music and dance Ghazali brought Sufism to insurmountable heights of doctrinal formulation, his detractor
Ibn al-Jawzī completely rejected him, and Ibn Taymiyyah, as well as order the music and dance, developed sterile polemics against the work of the greatest of Sufi masters of all time, that Muhi ad-Din Ibn al-'Arabî who was the heir of al-Ghazali in the rank of "Pole of Time" . This disagreement between a letter of spiritual and a fundamentalist Islamic doctrine is in fact come down to our days, so much so that contemporary fundamentalists, that the Wahhabis and Ikhwanidi, see Ibn Taymiyyah in one of their capiscuola, and oppose so fiercely to what Ibn al-Ghazali - 'Arabs. The legacy of these two authors, therefore, to be followed related to the hope of rebirth of the potential cultural, aesthetic and artistic activities of the Islamic world, while that of Ibn Taymiyyah and his followers continue to debase the deeper dimensions of Islam and to the point path of decadence, intolerance and obscurantism.
regard to the right, within the school SCIAF al-Ghazali is considered second only to its founder as-Shafi'i, and in the speculative theology (kalam) is one of the greatest exponents of Ash'arite. In the context of Sufism is then considered a "Pole of Time" (Qutb az-Zaman), ie, the beginning of higher rank who is living in a given period.
The literature of al-Ghazali is very wide and extended to many disciplines. His main work is Ihyā''ulūm ad-Din (The revivificazione of religious sciences), a multi-volume compendium that is considered a veritable encyclopedia of Islamic sciences. Of this al-Ghazali himself composed two synthetic summaries, one in Arabic, entitled Al-arba'īn fi usul ad-Din (The Forty principles of religion), and the other in Persian, called Kimiya-e Sa ' Adah (The Alchemy of Happiness). From this it seems appropriate to quote some passages from the chapter entitled "About the role of music and dance as the pillars of the spiritual practice." In our view, they allow you to dispel the assumption under which the Islamic jurists
would be detrimental as opposed to the use of musical instruments and dance practice.
"The Most High - says al-Ghazali - has designed the human heart so that it contains a hidden fire which is awakened by music and harmony, and that can lead man beyond by himself, in ecstasy. These harmonies are echoes of that higher world of beauty that
call the 'spirit world'. They point to man his relationship with that world, and produce in him an emotion so deep and so strange that he is not able to explain
. The effects of music and dance are more or less deep in proportion to the extent that those on whom they are acting more or less prone to movement, they flare up the fire that is dormant in the heart, regardless of whether it is a
fire sensual, or divine and spiritual. "As a result there have been many disputes among theologians about the permissibility of music and dance from the religious point of view." Here we merely asserts
that music and dance is not something external to instill in the heart, but simply to flare up emotions - albeit dormant - are already present in it. Therefore, if a man has in his heart the love of God which is required by law, it is perfectly legal, and even meritorious, that he devotes to activities that help to increase. On the contrary, if you have a heart full of desire to dominate the senses, music and dancing will only increase it, and in his case are therefore prohibited. As one who listens to music or attend the dance for the purpose of mere entertainment, music and dance in his case are neither lawful nor
prohibited, but simply indifferent. The fact that they produce pleasure is not in itself sufficient to bring prohibited. Listen to the birds singing, contemplating the green grass or a running brook that they are also activities that give pleasure, but no one ever dreamed of
and define them as prohibited. "Those who deny the reality of the ecstasies and other spiritual experiences of the Sufis do not prove that their narrow-mindedness. It should be recognized, however, some mitigating them, and as difficult to believe in the existence of states that have not experienced firsthand, as well as a blind man is difficult to contemplate that the green grass or a running brook that is pleasant or for a boy and difficult to understand the pleasure of governing. The wise man, however, despite not having experience of those states in person, you will look good and deny their reality. What folly could be greater than deny the reality of a thing for the mere fact of not having experienced
? "
So if al-Ghazali believes that music and dance, respectively, should be considered beneficial or harmful depending on the state of mind that generate the result, some lawyers rear
Hanbali school, as Ibn al-Jawzī (1116-1201) and Ibn Taymiyyah (1263-1328) are so hostile to the dance to be condemned in toto, sometimes resorting to sophistry and specious arguments of nature . 'Abd al-Rahman ibn al-Jawzī al-Baghdadi was a literalist
animated by a strong hostility to the Sufis in general and al-Ghazali, in particular, so as to write an entire treatise against him, entitled al-I'lām Ahya ' aghlāt bi-al-Ihya '(Notification of living beings
errors in the Ihya'). Should therefore not surprising that he not only condemns every kind of dance, including Sufi, but even any kind of singing, including qasīdah, that is the anthem of religious argument. In Talbīs Iblis (Lucifer's temptation) Ibn al-Jawzī says
"The hearing music and dance have two defects: first, distract the heart from the knowledge of the power of Almighty God, and encourage the other pleasures of this world and make you give free rein to the passions of the senses, including the main stimulus to the sexual union. Thus, there is a relationship between music and adultery: the music is a pleasure for the spirit, just as adultery is the greatest of pleasures for the soul desires. For this reason, lawyers close to me say that musicians and dancers are not respectable people, and consequently believe that their testimony might be used in court. Music is in fact losing to a sense of proportion and the use of reason and cause behaviors similar to those induced by the wine drunk in the spirit. For this we go
prohibited. "
continues blaming the Sufis and their dance
" When the excitement of the Sufi dance becomes more intense, one of them urges whoever is sitting next to stand with him. Under their rule, whoever receives the call can not refuse to get up. When the first rising, the others get up with him. If one of them turns his head, so do others and ceremonies of this sort supposed to worship God and to show him submissive. Then, when their excitement and became more intense, they throw their clothes to the musicians. Sometimes the whole cast, sometimes after being torn apart. " The same preconceived hostility towards music and dance, as demonstrated by Taqi al-Din Abu 'Abbas Ahmad ibn Taymiyyah al-Harran, the one that it is considered the forerunner of contemporary fundamentalist movements. While condemning the dance, Ibn Taymiyyah did not find anything untoward in resorting to an interpretation of the Koran itself very specious. Verse 37 of Surah of the Night Journey (XVII) states that: "Wa beyond tamshi fi al-ardi Marah," ie "do not walk the earth with insolence." It seems clear that the verse in question does not in itself
imposes nothing on the dance, but merely to prohibit the vainglory and the pride of those who walk ostentatiously. Ibn Taymiyyah claims, however, read this as a condemnation of the dance and - in the footsteps of Ibn al-Jawzī - explains that "dance is something relevant to this kind of arrogance." This way of arguing, which is to force the legal sources just to prove a preconceived thesis, was typical of Ibn Taymiyyah and was indeed one of the reasons that led to his sentence to life imprisonment for heresy by the emir of Damascus Ibn Qalawun. It is no coincidence that, while after his death, al-Ghazali became undisputed legal authority for the entire Islamic world, Ibn al-Jawzī instead was sidelined because of his pedantic literalism, while Ibn Taymiyyah was even imprisoned by those who feared the spread of his extremism. It 'also significant that while the connoisseur of music and dance Ghazali brought Sufism to insurmountable heights of doctrinal formulation, his detractor
Ibn al-Jawzī completely rejected him, and Ibn Taymiyyah, as well as order the music and dance, developed sterile polemics against the work of the greatest of Sufi masters of all time, that Muhi ad-Din Ibn al-'Arabî who was the heir of al-Ghazali in the rank of "Pole of Time" . This disagreement between a letter of spiritual and a fundamentalist Islamic doctrine is in fact come down to our days, so much so that contemporary fundamentalists, that the Wahhabis and Ikhwanidi, see Ibn Taymiyyah in one of their capiscuola, and oppose so fiercely to what Ibn al-Ghazali - 'Arabs. The legacy of these two authors, therefore, to be followed related to the hope of rebirth of the potential cultural, aesthetic and artistic activities of the Islamic world, while that of Ibn Taymiyyah and his followers continue to debase the deeper dimensions of Islam and to the point path of decadence, intolerance and obscurantism.
0 comments:
Post a Comment