Dr. Rasoul Jafarian is the associate professor of history at Tehran University. His remarkable CV is full of scientific studies, teachings, and executive activities. He has written a great number of articles, books, about the Safavid dynasty, Shia, and Iranian studies. Moreover, he has daily notes on his personal website to introduce visitors to current cultural and political evolutions of the Islamic world, particularly Iran.
Digitalizing all manuscripts and documents of Parliament library, publishing numerous books and holding many national and international conferences are just some activities done by Jafarian when he was the director of the Parliament library. Moreover, he is the director of the library of Iran and Islam in Qum.
One of his recent concerns is the history of science in Islamic Civilization in Medieval Times. In this regard, he has compiled his articles in “The Concept of Science in Islamic Civilization” which will be published at Elm publication in the near future. (To learn more about Dr. Rasoul Jafarian you can visit here)
Dear Prof. Jafarian thank you so much for your time. Let’s start our interview with this question as one of the experts in Iranian medieval history how do you define Iranian medieval history? In other words, when is the Medieval Times in your classification of Iranian history?
To consider history as medieval, ancient or any other era is a relative classification. Fundamentally defining historical eras depends on specific parameters like main social and political evolutions over the course of time. Classification of history as the medieval or contemporary era is in accordance with the European classifications of their own history. In fact, the concept of Medieval Times or middle age which has clear economic, philosophical, and religious characteristics in Europe and the USA has influenced our viewpoints about history. Of course, there is no problem if we regard some specified circumstances to classify history into various eras and to analyze events. For instance, you may even consider the Sassanid era as a Medieval Times between the Parthian Empire and the Islamic era. It’s worth mentioning that the Iranian Medieval Times has its own characteristics which are completely distinguished from the European middle age. There is a cultural decline in Europe in Middle Ages, while we have very different cultural conditions in Iran.
I believe that we have different classifications on the basis of diverse parameters. If you give more importance to the history of thought and philosophy or the political history particularly the history of empires and dynasties, or if art and literature are your subjects of studies, you will have different classifications of history.
In my classification, the 9th to 13th or 15th centuries can be considered as the Iranian medieval era. These definitions are acceptable as long as they are not considered as definitive invariable classifications. However, I believe that we should have more exact parameters in defining historical eras.
Do we have “the history of science” as a critical issue in Medieval Times? Do we have any particular book or essay in this regard?
If we consider the 9th to 15th centuries as Medieval Times, we have science, pseudoscience, and even ignorance classified as the field of science. We have all theoretical and practical fields of science. We can follow traces of science in art, technology, and every aspect of our daily lives. However, rarely do people pay attention to the philosophy of science or the history of science.
In other words, we deal with two levels of science: the first are those fields of science with which our daily life is concerned. The second is those discussions dealing with philosophy and the history of science. The latter level of science was seriously studied in Medieval Times. We have many critical unprecedented arguments about the philosophy of science and its history in Medieval Times which was not followed in later eras. Philosophers and theologians were determined to defend “the science”, to illustrate its nature, and to evaluate its credibility. They resisted against Akhbaries and all other anti-science people who believed that “science” would make people alien to religion and so they opposed all kinds of science. Many remarkable essays and books were written in the 9th to 11th century about science and its nature, levels, and classifications. Afterward, these arguments were superficially imitated and so they have not developed anymore.
What are your main concerns regarding the history of science in Medieval Times?
Flourishing human thought in Medieval Times is due to exact scientific viewpoints developed in this era. Even though these viewpoints were not dominant in society, they were common among some scholars. Despite their limitations, these scholars who mainly lived in Khurasan and Baghdad proposed many crucial arguments. Because of these critical viewpoints, many scientific works were written in the 3rd and 4th centuries.
I am going to extract these viewpoints from old scientific textbooks to show that our science developments in that era were dependent on the efforts of some special scholars. Furthermore, I intend to elaborate that those paradigms of science production derived from Greece, India, Iran, and other civilizations were impassable obstacles in the way of scientific progress. In other words, they did not facilitate the process of scientific progress of the Islamic civilization. Having made these kinds of thoughts sacred through time did not let thinkers criticize or evaluate them; this is one of the main issues that I am going to examine in my studies.
You have studied the problem of “superstitions” in the articles “The Concept of Science in Islamic Civilization in Ajayeb al- Makhluqat” and also “The Concept of Superstition in Medieval Islamic Resources”. Do we have any fields of science that would be considered superstitions in later eras?
Science in mind and reality is a pure problem whose nature is gradually influenced by social and human issues. Astronomy and mathematics are two exact fields of science. However, astronomy, for example, is affected by philosophical traditional, and human issues. Being intertwined with unscientific problems like prophesying and determining lucky (sa’d) and unlucky (nahs) days has reduced its purity. To give another example, physics and chemistry are the two main exact fields of science. But when chemistry is integrated with Alchemy i.e. a combination of chemistry and philosophy of life, it would degenerate.
I have written an article about Ajayeb al-Makhluqat which is an encyclopedia of medieval sciences. This book includes a collection of “human knowledge” about the world, nature, and humans in Medieval Times. This encyclopedia mostly contains a collection of pseudoscience information and entries based on ignorance. It has been written to increase general knowledge, but it’s influenced by traditional sacred thought which is the obstacle to learning. Astronomy in comparison to other fields of science is more interwoven with ignorance.
Regarding the fact that your professional field of study is the science of history, what’s your idea about the science of history in Medieval Times?
The history of science is just one of those sciences standing between two ends of science and ignorance. History has been in some eras as a science like mathematics and astronomy; however, it is a human science and so is more interwoven with science, philosophy, and ignorance. Historical books like Moruj al-Zahab, Tarikh-e Ya’qubi, and Akhbar al-Tawal are based on principles of the science of history in Medieval Times.
These works were so different from biblical storytelling or many other historical textbooks are written in later eras. However, I believe that the principles of science in historical books of Medieval Times should be evaluated with respect to the scientific progress of that era. In geography, for example, we were not developed in our research instruments and methodology.
What is the origin of science in Medieval Times? I mean whether it’s based on religion, experiments, or arguments?
Methodological confusions in empirical and religious sciences and the application of philosophical methods in experimental sciences are challenging problems in Medieval Times. This situation was common in Greece, Alexandria India, and the Islamic world. Unlike Muslim and Indian scholars, Greek thinkers had determined some boundaries between different fields of science and so they somehow managed to resolve these methodological confusions. Even though Muslims distinguished empirical and philosophical sciences, their methodological confusions led to unreliable results. Even now, sciences have challenging methodological problems.
What is the boundary between the realm of science and craft in Medieval Times? In other words, do we have any crafts changed into science through time?
Qazi Sa’ed Andolosi has distinguished science and crafts in Al-Ta’rif Betabaqat al-Omam. He states that some nations are interested in sciences and some others such as the Chinese are involved with crafts. Crafts in his classification constitute paintings, making tools, and even warfare in which Turk warriors were well known. Generally speaking, scholars and ordinary people rarely distinguished science and crafts. Moreover, they considered experimental achievements as a subdivision of philosophical sciences. Crafts were instructed not in schools but in workshops under the guidance of skilled craftsmen. In other words, Unlike science, crafts were not taught or conveyed via books. Even now, there are many crafts that have not changed into science.
Were there any scientific exchanges between the Islamic world and other countries?
We had international scientific exchanges in all eras. Scientific knowledge transmitted through successive generations has been produced by all civilizations. We can find a lot of information about the directions the sciences have passed through in Al-Ta’rif Betabaqat-e Al-Omam by Qazi Sa’ed. To conclude scientific exchanges raised many questions among Muslim scholars.
Thank you so much for your plausible responses.
Tr. by Maryam Kamali
Rasoul Jafarian ni profesa wa historia katika Chuo Kikuu cha Tehran. CV yake ya ajabu imejaa masomo ya kisayansi, mafundisho, na shughuli za utendaji. Ameandika idadi kubwa ya makala, vitabu, kuhusu nasaba ya Safavid, Shia, na masomo ya Iran. Zaidi ya hayo, ana maelezo ya kila siku kwenye tovuti yake binafsi ili kuwajulisha wageni juu ya maendeleo ya kisasa ya kitamaduni na kisiasa ya ulimwengu wa Kiislamu, haswa Iran. Kufanya maandishi na hati zote za maktaba ya Bunge kuwa za dijiti, kuchapisha vitabu vingi na kufanya mikutano mingi ya kitaifa na kimataifa ni baadhi tu ya shughuli zilizofanywa na Jafari wakati alikuwa mkurugenzi wa maktaba ya Bunge. Zaidi ya hayo, yeye ni mkurugenzi wa maktaba ya Iran na Uislamu katika Qum. Moja ya wasiwasi wake wa hivi karibuni ni historia ya sayansi katika ustaarabu wa Kiislamu katika nyakati za enzi za kati. Katika suala hili, amekusanya makala zake katika <unk>The Concept of Science in Islamic Civilization<unk> ambayo itachapishwa katika Elm publication katika siku zijazo. Kwa maelezo zaidi kuhusu Dr. Rasool Jafarian, tafadhali angalia hapa. Hebu tuanze mahojiano yetu na swali hili kama mmoja wa wataalamu wa historia ya Iran ya enzi za kati jinsi unavyofafanua historia ya Iran ya enzi za kati? Kwa maneno mengine, ni lini nyakati za enzi za kati katika uainishaji wako wa historia ya Iran? Kuona historia kuwa ya enzi za kati, za kale au enzi nyingine yoyote ni uainishaji wa jamaa. Kimsingi kufafanua enzi za kihistoria inategemea vigezo maalum kama maendeleo kuu ya kijamii na kisiasa kwa muda. Uainishaji wa historia kama enzi ya enzi za kati au za kisasa ni kulingana na uainishaji wa Ulaya wa historia yao wenyewe. Kwa kweli, dhana ya nyakati za enzi za kati au enzi za kati, ambayo ina sifa za wazi za kiuchumi, kifalsafa, na kidini huko Ulaya na Marekani, imeathiri maoni yetu juu ya historia. Bila shaka, hakuna tatizo ikiwa tutaangalia hali fulani hususa ili kugawanya historia katika vipindi mbalimbali na kuchanganua matukio. Kwa mfano, unaweza hata kufikiria enzi ya Sassanid kama Enzi za Kati kati ya Milki ya Parthia na enzi ya Kiislamu. Ni muhimu kutaja kwamba nyakati za Iran za enzi za kati zina sifa zake ambazo zinatofautiana kabisa na enzi za kati za Ulaya. Utamaduni wa Ulaya ulipungua katika enzi za kati, wakati hali za utamaduni zilikuwa tofauti sana nchini Iran. Ninaamini kwamba tuna uainishaji tofauti kwa msingi wa vigezo mbalimbali. Kama wewe kutoa umuhimu zaidi kwa historia ya mawazo na falsafa au historia ya kisiasa, hasa historia ya milki na nasaba, au kama sanaa na fasihi ni masomo yako, utakuwa na tofauti uainishaji wa historia. Katika orodha hii, karne ya 9 hadi 13 inaweza kuonwa kama enzi ya Iran ya enzi za kati. Ufafanuzi huu unakubaliwa kwa muda mrefu kama wao si kuchukuliwa kama uainishaji wa mwisho invariable. Hata hivyo, naamini kwamba tunapaswa kuwa na vigezo sahihi zaidi katika kufafanua enzi za kihistoria. Je, tuna <unk>historia ya sayansi<unk> kama suala muhimu katika nyakati za enzi za kati? Je, tuna kitabu au insha fulani hususa kuhusiana na jambo hilo? "Kama tunaona karne ya 9 hadi 15 kama ""Nguvu za Enzi za Kati,"" tuna sayansi, pseudoscience, na hata ujinga uliotambuliwa kama uwanja wa sayansi." Tuna nyanja zote za kisayansi za kinadharia na za vitendo. Tunaweza kufuata alama za sayansi katika sanaa, teknolojia, na kila sehemu ya maisha yetu ya kila siku. Hata hivyo, ni mara chache sana watu hufikiria falsafa ya sayansi au historia ya sayansi. Kwa maneno mengine, tunashughulika na ngazi mbili za sayansi: ya kwanza ni zile nyanja za sayansi ambazo zina wasiwasi na maisha yetu ya kila siku. Ya pili ni majadiliano hayo yanayohusu falsafa na historia ya sayansi. Kiwango cha mwisho cha sayansi kilijaribiwa kwa uzito katika Enzi za Kati. """Tuna hoja nyingi zisizo na kifani kuhusu falsafa ya sayansi na historia yake katika nyakati za enzi za kati ambazo hazikufuatwa katika enzi za baadaye." Wanafalsafa na wanatheolojia walikuwa na azimio la kutetea "sayansi", kuelezea asili yake, na kutathmini uaminifu wake. Walipinga Akhbaris na watu wengine wote wapinga sayansi ambao waliamini kwamba "sayansi" ingewafanya watu kuwa wageni kwa dini na hivyo walipinga aina zote za sayansi. Katika karne ya 9 hadi 11, vitabu vingi vya ajabu viliandikwa kuhusu sayansi na asili yake, viwango vyake, na uainishaji wake. Baadaye, hoja hizo zilirekodiwa kwa njia ya juu-juu na hivyo hazijaendelea tena. Ni nini wasiwasi wako kuu kuhusu historia ya sayansi katika nyakati za enzi za kati? Mawazo ya kibinadamu yaliyofanikiwa katika Enzi za Kati yalisababishwa na maoni sahihi ya kisayansi yaliyobuniwa katika enzi hiyo. Ingawa maoni hayo hayakuwa ya kawaida katika jamii, yalikuwa ya kawaida miongoni mwa wasomi fulani. Licha ya mapungufu yao, wasomi hao ambao waliishi hasa katika Khurasan na Baghdad walipendekeza hoja nyingi muhimu. Kwa sababu ya maoni hayo ya kukosoa, vitabu vingi vya kisayansi viliandikwa katika karne ya tatu na ya nne. Nitachukua maoni haya kutoka kwa vitabu vya zamani vya kisayansi ili kuonyesha kwamba maendeleo yetu ya kisayansi katika enzi hiyo yalitegemea juhudi za wasomi fulani maalum. "Kwa kuongezea, nina nia ya kueleza kwamba mifano hiyo ya uzalishaji wa sayansi inayotokana na Ugiriki, India, Iran, na ustaarabu mwingine ilikuwa ""kizuizi kisichoweza kuvunjwa"" katika njia ya maendeleo ya kisayansi." Kwa maneno mengine, hazikuwezesha mchakato wa maendeleo ya kisayansi ya ustaarabu wa Kiislamu. Kufanya mawazo ya aina hii kuwa matakatifu kwa muda haijawawezesha wasomi kuyashutumu au kuyathamini; hii ni moja ya masuala makuu ambayo nitachunguza katika masomo yangu. Umechunguza tatizo la "chacha" katika makala "The Concept of Science in Islamic Civilization in Ajayeb al-Makhluqat" na pia "The Concept of Superstition in Medieval Islamic Resources". Je, kuna mambo fulani ya kisayansi ambayo yangeonwa kuwa ushirikina katika nyakati za baadaye? Sayansi katika akili na ukweli ni tatizo safi ambalo asili yake huathiriwa hatua kwa hatua na masuala ya kijamii na ya kibinadamu. Astronomia na hisabati ni nyanja mbili halisi za sayansi. Hata hivyo, elimu ya nyota, kwa mfano, huathiriwa na masuala ya kifalsafa, ya kitamaduni, na ya kibinadamu. Kuwa na matatizo yasiyo ya kisayansi kama vile kutabiri na kuamua siku zenye bahati (sad) na zisizo na bahati (nahs) imepunguza usafi wake. Kwa mfano mwingine, fizikia na kemia ni nyanja mbili kuu za sayansi. Lakini wakati kemia ni jumuishi na Alchemy yaani Kwa sababu ya mchanganyiko wa kemia na falsafa ya maisha, inaweza kuharibika. "Kama ilivyoelezwa katika kitabu cha Ajayeb al-Makhluqat, ""Ensaiklopedia ya Sayansi ya Enzi za Kati.""" Kitabu hiki kinatia ndani mkusanyiko wa "ujuzi wa kibinadamu" kuhusu ulimwengu, asili, na wanadamu katika Enzi za Kati. Ensaiklopedia hii hasa ina mkusanyiko wa habari ya pseudoscience na entries kulingana na ujinga. Imeandikwa ili kuongeza maarifa ya jumla, lakini imeathiriwa na mawazo matakatifu ya jadi ambayo ni kizuizi cha kujifunza. Kwa kulinganisha na nyanja nyingine za sayansi, elimu ya nyota imeunganishwa zaidi na ujinga. Kuhusu ukweli kwamba uwanja wako wa kitaaluma wa utafiti ni sayansi ya historia, nini ni wazo lako kuhusu sayansi ya historia katika nyakati za enzi za kati? Historia ya sayansi ni moja tu ya sayansi hizo zilizopo kati ya ncha mbili za sayansi na ujinga. Historia imekuwa katika nyakati fulani kama sayansi kama hisabati na elimu ya nyota; hata hivyo, ni sayansi ya binadamu na hivyo ni zaidi interwoven na sayansi, falsafa, na ujinga. Vitabu vya kihistoria kama vile Moruj al-Zahab, Tarikh-e Yaqubi, na Akhbar al-Tawal vinategemea kanuni za sayansi ya historia katika nyakati za enzi za kati. Kitabu hiki ni tofauti sana na vitabu vya Biblia au vitabu vingine vya kihistoria vilivyoandikwa katika enzi za baadaye. Hata hivyo, ninaamini kwamba kanuni za sayansi katika vitabu vya kihistoria vya Enzi za Kati zinapaswa kutathminiwa kuhusiana na maendeleo ya kisayansi ya enzi hiyo. Katika jiografia, kwa mfano, hatukuendelea katika vyombo vyetu vya utafiti na mbinu. Sayansi ilianzaje katika Enzi za Kati? Namaanisha kama ni msingi wa dini, majaribio, au hoja? Mvurugo wa mbinu katika sayansi ya majaribio na ya kidini na matumizi ya mbinu za kifalsafa katika sayansi ya majaribio ni matatizo ya changamoto katika nyakati za enzi za kati. Hali hiyo ilikuwa ya kawaida katika Ugiriki, Aleksandria, India, na ulimwengu wa Kiislamu. Tofauti na wasomi wa Kiislamu na Wahindi, wasomi wa Kigiriki walikuwa wameamua mipaka kati ya nyanja tofauti za sayansi na hivyo kwa njia fulani walifanikiwa kutatua machafuko haya ya mbinu. Ingawa Waislamu walitenganisha sayansi ya majaribio na ya kifalsafa, kuchanganyikiwa kwao kwa mbinu kulisababisha matokeo yasiyoaminika. Hata sasa, sayansi ina matatizo magumu ya mbinu. Ni nini mpaka kati ya ulimwengu wa sayansi na ufundi katika Enzi za Kati? Kwa maneno mengine, je, kuna ufundi wowote uliogeuzwa kuwa sayansi kwa muda? Qazi Saed Andolosi ameweka sifa za sayansi na ufundi katika Al-Tarif Betabaqat al-Omam. "Anasema: ""Nchi fulani zinavutiwa na sayansi, na nyingine, kama vile China, zinajihusisha na ufundi.""" Ufundi katika uainishaji wake ni michoro, kutengeneza vifaa, na hata vita ambavyo wapiganaji wa Kituruki walijulikana sana. Kwa ujumla, wasomi na watu wa kawaida hawakufanya tofauti kati ya sayansi na ufundi. Isitoshe, waliona mafanikio ya majaribio kuwa sehemu ndogo ya sayansi ya kifalsafa. Ufundi haukufundishwa shuleni bali katika warsha chini ya mwongozo wa mafundi stadi. Kwa maneno mengine, tofauti na sayansi, ufundi haukufundishwa au kuenezwa kupitia vitabu. Hata sasa, kuna ufundi mwingi ambao haujabadilika kuwa sayansi. Je, kulikuwa na mabadilishano yoyote ya kisayansi kati ya ulimwengu wa Kiislamu na nchi nyingine? Tulikuwa na mabadilishano ya kisayansi ya kimataifa katika enzi zote. Ujuzi wa kisayansi uliopitishwa kupitia vizazi vilivyopita umetokezwa na ustaarabu wote. Tunaweza kupata habari nyingi kuhusu mwelekeo ambao sayansi imepita katika Al-Ta'rif Betabaqat-e Al-Omam na Qazi Sa'ed. Kufikia mwisho wa mabadilishano ya kisayansi kulizua maswali mengi miongoni mwa wasomi Waislamu. Asanteni sana kwa majibu yenu yenye kusadikisha. Tr. Maryam Kamali