Indian Antiquary Vol 56

Author(s): Richard Carnac Temple, Charles E A W Oldham, Krishnaswami Aiyangar
Publisher: Swati Publications

Page 84

89
THE INDIAN ANTIQUARY
[APRIL, 1927
Nicholson's attitude in this matter is rather hesitating and indefinite. In the first place, he is inclined to hold that Sufism had an independent origin within Islam; but at the same time, he is not blind to the possibility of foreign influence. There, however, he warns us that if Sufism had a foreign origin, it must be "sought in Neo-Platonism and Gnosticism", rather than in any Indian system. It may be that Neo-Platonism and Gnosticism were, in their turn, influenced by Indian thought; "but this is a large question which has not been, and perhaps never can be, definitely settled". (JRAS., 1906, p. 320.) On the other hand, apart from this possible indirect influence, he is willing even to admit direct influence of Indian thought on Sufism; but he would not admit that this was possible during the initial stages of Sufism. "The direct influence of Indian ideas on Sufism", he says, "though undeniably great, was posterior and secondary to the influence exerted by Greek and Syrian speculation" (JRAS., 1906, p. 320).
So far we have seen that, though in its beginning Sufism is regarded as of independent origin, yet in its subsequent history the possibility of Vedantic influence is admitted in a general way. There is not much proof, but the hypothesis is not ruled out. Browne, however, is categorically against even such an hypothesis (Literary History of Persia, p. 419). He says: "Though in Sasanian times, notably in the sixth century of our era during the reign of Nushirwan, a certain exchange of ideas took place between Persia and India, no influence can be shown to have been exerted by the latter country on the former during Muhammadan times, till after the full development of the Sufi system, which was practically completed, when Al-Beruni.... wrote his famous memoir." Browne, therefore, is not only unwilling to trace the origin of Sufism to Indian thought, but he is not prepared even to admit Indian influence on the subsequent history of this branch of Islamic culture.
On the whole, therefore, the idea of Vedantic influence on Sufism is not very favourably received by European scholars. (Cf. also, Margoliouth, Early Development of Muhammadanism, Lectures V and VI.) Similarity between the two systems is not denied; but to prove indebtedness either way, something more than mere resemblance is necessary. And this is exactly what is not found, so far as Vedantism is concerned. With regard to Buddhism, as we have already seen, opinion is more favourable. This is no doubt due to the fact that it was a living religion in the neighbourhood of Sufism even after the rise of Islam. As to Vedantism, it cannot be shown that it was being cultivated in that territory before and after the rise of Sufism; nor can it be shown that Sufism had any direct connection with it. Browne, therefore, is right in maintaining that no influence can be shown to have been exerted' by India on Sufism.
But at the same time, it seems to be going too far not to allow even the possibility of such an influence. We cannot get over the fact of political and commercial intercourse between India and the west for a fairly long period, from pre-historic times up to a date posterior to the rise of Islam. And there is the fact of Indian colonies in western Asia. Even Browne admits that in the sixth century of our era' an exchange of ideas took place between Persia and India. And then again, we have the further fact that during the eighth-ninth century A.D., the court of Bagdad patronised Hindu learning. The ministerial family of Barmak "engaged Hindu scholars to come to Bagdad, made them the chief physicians of their hospitals, and ordered them to translate from Sanskrit into Arabic books on medicine, pharmacology, toxicology, philosophy, astrology, and other subjects. Still in later centuries Muslim scholars sometimes travelled for the same purposes as the emissaries of the Barmak." (Sachau; English Translation of Al-Beruni; Introduction, pp. xxxi-xxxii.) As to this family of Barmak, or the Barmakides, we are told that they came from a Buddhist temple (NavaBihara) in Balkh.
The position then is this: In the sixth century, an exchange of ideas took place between Persia and India, even according to Browne; and in the eighth century, Hindus were expressly