Was Muslim Astronomy the Harbinger of Copernicanism?

#11, Didn`t Vasco da Gama discover India in the 15th Century? AD! :)

Let`s see Columbus discovered America.
Magellan discovered the Philippines.
Mohammed Bin Qasim discovered Pakistan.
... and Al Gore discovered the Internet. :)

Thanks, Jang. Looking at the Table of Contents, I was surprised at how little I really knew about this ancient past.

Ibn Khaldun`s work ``Muqaddimah`` is an interesting read with reference to the society of those times. They considered science a luxury, and not a necessity. That`s why it wasn`t given the importance given to crafts. This book also has an interesting commentary on music as a profession.

Vertex:

In science and technology, there is a time for every development to take place. Miracles do not happen in science although some scientists do get miraculous inspiration once in a while. I wrote some place that the edifice of science is raised brick by brick, from bottom upward. Copernicus would come only after Ibn-al-Shatir because he needed the groundwork that his predecessors had prepared. Although I also mentioned in the article that it is really strange why the Arab astronomers didn’t go all the way for heliocentrism when they were so very discontent with the geocentric system and had the basic tools for developing the heliocentric theory? Kepler built on Galileo’s and Copernicus’s work; he couldn’t forestall Newton because Kepler’s time was not yet ripe for formulating the theory of gravitation. The industrial revolution came more than a century afterwards.

Einstein needed Newton’s theory of gravitation to develop his relativity and he couldn’t have succeeded without the mathematics developed earlier by Bernhard Riemann. So on, and so forth.

Some better historical information might come to light some day because thousands of documents pertaining to Arab developments are stored in libraries, which have not been read and deciphered yet. History of Arab science is still unraveling. Wishing you well,

Mohammad Gill

The lens of history provides 20/20 hindsight. How nice!

Original ``scientists`` (modern, institutionalized science traces itself back to the 18th century) were at first hacks...nothing more than witch doctors trying methodolgical ways to convert substances into gold. For the most part, they dealt with useless metaphysical concepts, hardly the theories (backed by math) of today.

One thing I think you seriously overlook Gill Sahib was that these scientists really didn`t offer much in terms of application. If you had a bunch of people renumerating on the nature of this and that, and had at no time performed any experiments to back up your results...I don`t think a ``rational`` man of the time would really think twice about the fate of these thinkers.

Today, the Ulema (except the one or two oft quoted Saudi blokes) doesn`t say peep against science. They can`t. You can`t argue with the space shuttle. And they know it.

At best, the can belittle it`s importance...but thanks to technology, even that is a wasted effort. We`re at a point in history where technological acheivement is following scientific discovery...this is powerful.

Most of the Mullah types now seek to usurp science for an ideological goal...but hey, which society isn`t doing that?

One can blame the Mullah for the lack of science in our socities...but the fact is, it`s all about the government. How about shifting blame where it belongs for a change?

kala others interested in university in india..

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0813365996/qid=1123853859/sr=8-14/ref=pd_bbs_sbs_14/104-2276468-6611112?v=glance&s=books&n=507846

this is a very readble book of xuanznag`s travels which he did expressly to come study at the Nalanda. the book is very readable with many pictures and maps and great footnotes. there is a very nice map of nalanda univ and its various colleges.

the visitor claims the indians to be very clean (2 baths a day), dress using wahsable linens and not skins, and he finds them not serious in a philosophical way....they tend to break in to a frivoulos song and a dance. i guess bollywood was alive even then.

vivek

I will need to google a little to answer more specifically, but there were a number of different universities spread all over India, from Taxila in Pakistan to Magadha in Bihar (?), and in the south.

Small universities offered specialized education while the biggest ones like Nalanda aimed to teach everything worth teaching. A great deal of this education was secular, with standard subjects like music, logic, philosophy, astronomy, languages etc.

By the way, Pakistan probably had the world`s first thriving University at Taxila, a full half a millennium or more before Plato established his institution (Academy) in Greece.

Regarding the education being oral, I don`t know if it was any different than it was in the later Greece. I do recall reading somewhere about the Chinese visitor Huen Tsang returning to China, carrying books in sacks loaded on the backs of horses. But that was, of course, in the much later period, about 7th Century AD.

satyamvada,
Agreed with you that invasions played a big role in disrupting institutions, but most of the education was from mouth to mouth, and hence a lot of it was lost with time. Thanjavur in Tamil Nadu has a large collection of manuscripts, but I don`t know how much of it is on science.

kaalchakra,
I am curious, what were the departments in our ancient universities?

Vivek (#28)

India had a long tradition of establishing institutions for transmission of knowledge
of various shastras - including gajashastra (taking care of elephants), ashvashastra (horses), planting crops etc. There are so called `shakas` and the various
guru-shishya parampara in various subjects. There were a number of educational
institutions in India. Read Dharmapal`s book called `The Beautiful Tree` - it indicates
the level of sophistication in India.

One must not forget - that India has suffered tremendously due to invasions - The
temples and educational institutions of learning were wiped out in North India.
Family traditions were destroyed. The destruction is belittled by many to be
politically correct. However, you should read the original documents of the invaders
themselves.

Even with all the destruction, India now has the largest collection of ancient
manuscripts in the world (almost 5 million) - a number which is truly amazing
for the pre-modern world.

Indian society did not take to science because of a few iit`s - as some fools seem
to think. The Indian scientific tradition is long.

Vivek

Interesting thought, but could the ancient universities of say Taxila or Ujjaini have existed without documentation and codification of knowledge?

Check out:
http://www.infinityfoundation.com/mandala/t_es/t_es_shah_m_astronomy_frameset.htm

Many of the so called arabic/islamic science can be attributed to Indian and even
pre-islamic traditions.
The same is true of music. Most of the musical traditions found in the middle east
are remnants of pre-islamic traditions.

Here is one clear explanation of the seven heavens that modern science has only very recently discovered, presented with self-explanatory pictures.

http://www.chowk.com/show_interactor_page.cgi?membername=humara_wah

---

Gill sahib and hindvi, why do such explanations maintain a hold on even librarians? Or for that matter, on college professors, or on the readers and the editors of Pakistanlink?

http://www.pakistanlink.com/Opinion/2005/July05/08/03.HTM

If the number of people emotionally eager to accept such `theories` is small, then there isn`t any real problem (the West has its own share of creationists).

I think science in India was achievement of a few great individuals and not of any institution. Lack of institutions showed in the form of lack of documentation leading to lack of systematic growth of science.

Kaalchakra:

Thanks for your positive post.

hindvi:

Huff`s book is enlightening in more than one way. He pinpointed the basic malaise that infected (and still does) the Muslim world as far as science and philosophy were concerned. Science was at the mercy of the rulers and the ulema. If the ulema declared that a particular philosopher or scientist was blasphemer and the ruler withdrew his protection, the philosopher (scientist) was manhandled, his property vandalized and his books were put to fire. This is how the Muslim world lost the works of their ancestral scientists and philosophers. Ibn-al-Rushd was exiled and his books were burnt. He died with a broken heart. On the other hand, his work laid the foundation of science in the west as the western scholars acknowledge it themselves.

Huff’s book was discussed at length by George Saliba, Professor of Arabic and Islamic Science, Columbia University. In his response, Huff wrote, “My particular inquiry began with what I called the ‘problem’ of Arabic science, namely, the intellectual question of how it happened that scholars communicating mainly in Arabic excelled in scientific inquiries during certain periods of time and yet, failed to continue these inquiries so that there was a decline, indeed such a steep and long-lasting decline, that people in later centuries might conclude that the ‘Arabs’ had never been masters of science…It is also obvious that dozens of Middle Eastern scholars and observers have agonized over this puzzle and sought to understand it for a very long time.”

As long as science and philosophy remain subservient to religion in the Muslim world, the natural and rational sciences will not flourish. Education and research need to be liberated. Religion should not be allowed to sit in judgment over what is, and isn’t, good science. Our ulema believe that the world began with the inception of Islam. Greek philosophy and sciences were not culturally and freely allowed within the Islamic world; they were considered foreign, alien, and misleading. This was a blind and blanket assessment. The situation at present is more or less the same. Professor Hoodbhoy is fighting a yeoman’s battle in Pakistan against the orchestration of education. Science and education of science need to be liberated from the State control and religion’s stranglehold. The Scriptures are outdated. For instance, the Quran speaks of ‘seven heavens’ repeatedly. What are these seven heavens? They are the spheres of Ptolemy’s astronomy. The Quranic cosmology is outdated as is Ptolemy’s. Space is boundless and is not confined by seven spheres or seven heavens (saba’as-samawaat).

Huff also wrote in his response, “Evidently, the teaching of philosophy and the natural sciences ran against the religious commitments and identity of the madrasas, an entity that persisted into the twentieth century. This was a major issue in my book, but Professor Saliba is entirely silent on the subject.” Professor Saliba and others should come out forcefully against the interference of madrasas in science education. Indeed, they are an outdated species and should be abolished and merged with the regular schools.

Science should become part of our culture. There are hardly any books on history of science written by the Muslim authors. The names of Ibn-al-Shatir, Nasir-al-Din Tusi, al-Battani, etc. are more alien in the Muslim world than Copernicus, Galileo, Kepler, etc. The students should be taught about all of them.

More or less, the same is true of the Hindu scientists and philosophers. We have to go to the western sources to learn about the contributions of the Hindu and Muslim scientists. There are hardly any indigenous books on them.

Until science ceases to be considered alien and it does not become part of our culture, there is little hope of rejuvenating it and the fields of other liberal knowledge. As Huff wrote in his response to Professor Saliba, “..It is one thing if an activity is pursued randomly by various actors; it is something else altogether if that activity is carried on collectively as a result of regularized process – that is, an institutionalization of the activity by the enactment of rules, norms and regulations. Clearly, the pursuit of science in Europe via institutionalization in the universities provided it a powerful advantage unknown in the Arab/Muslim world until very recently.” This advantage is still unknown in the Muslim world.

Mohammad Gill

same guy, i read the book a while ago, it has Jahangir on the cover astride a globe

Gill saheb, such information is most welcome. With the West being so obsessed with intellectual property rights these days, we must put in our own claims on the total financial value of zero and algebra :)

hindvi:

Are we talking about two different authors? You`re talking about Tuffy; I don`t think I have come across this author. I was talking about Tobu Huff.

Mohammad Gill

Gandiv:

``la`` also means ``nothing.`` In ``La ilaha il-Allah`` which is the first part of the Muslim kalimah, la is in the meaning of ``there is no...`` This part of Kalimah means ``there is no god but Allah.``
So far so good. Now I ha ve to make a correction. It appears that the letter symbols were not introduced by Arabs as I thought and stated. The Arab mathematicians used rhetorical algebra; the notations came later on.

Mohammad Gill

i think tuffy also mentions the devastation of the mongols and the anarchy that followed and the desire after that of muslims too prefer a thousand years of tyrrany to an hour of anarchy.

Mr gill

Tuffy lays out the legal innovation of the corporation as the most important reason for the diff. between islam`s retardation and the west`s progress. The corporation was an entity in itself within which came the university, a place seperate (at least theoretically) from the state and the church, from it also emerged the company an entity which could be sued, taken to court or accrue income just like an individual. In islam he believes science and the scientist was always secondary to religion and law.

I dont know how far this is true and i dont remember his book as emphasising the importance of the early repression of humanism by the church and the importance of the rennaissance rebellion neithor of which existed in islamic history, nor does he mention the contact with the east provied by the crusades.

The Indians are also right here in that the achievements of the muslim and the hindu mathematicians are too mixed, for example in the west generally Khwarizmi`s name is associated with algebra it is possible that he got ideas from india, in science and math rarely is an idea totally orignal even newton and einstein built on the shoulders of those who came before them, Newton owes to Tycho and Kepler a huge debt and in calculus may be even to Leibnitz, einstein similarly owes a massive debt to Maxwell, planck and especially Reiman with out whose definitions of n dimensional space and geodesics, einstein would not have the mathematics to create his physics. (unlike the greatest living physicst today Ed Witten who invents his own mathematics as he unites all the diff. strains of string theory) and reiman inturn owes a debt to the great Gauss and Dirichlet and so it goes.

you are right to point out though that most of whom are described as arab scientists by the west and arabs were really not arabs though they were all muslims.

Re: # 18

Thanks!

But then it should be just ``unknown`` not ``nothing``, ain`t it?
I think ``nothing`` symbolizes the void/absence whereas unknown symbolizes uncertainty.

vivek:

You have raised an issue about which I have been thinking for the last several days. I had mentioned about it in some of my previous articles but did not highlight it as much as it deserves. I started reading a book by Huffy after writing this article in which the author has focused on this issue. He said one of the main reasons for the decline of science in the Muslim world was that science was not institutionalized. Science was not taught and learned formally in self-empowered institutes or universities. Huffy says that in the Muslim heirarchy, legists (fuqaha) were at the top, below them were the mutakallamun, and at the lowest level were science and philosophy. So science could be sabotaged by the legists and the ulema whenever they wanted. Thanks for raising this point. With regards,

Mohammad Gill

Gandiv:

In setting up algebraic equations, it is assumed that the unknown entity (or the entity which needs to be calculated) is x or ``la`` as the Arabs used. When the equation is solved for x, its magnitude is determined. ``La`` was not zero; it was the unknown entity.

Mohammad Gill

Re: # 2

Refreshing as always Mr.Gill, thanks for another nice article.

They used ``la (nothing or unknown)`` and the western mathematicians started using ``x`` for ``la.``

Not sure if you mean this is related with zero(0), but the invention of zero ia attributed to India.

friend,
Science cannot be compartmentalised, but the scientist can be. Also we are talking of science in history over here. Back then science was not global to the extent as it is today, hence can be compartmentalised into regions.

Mr. Gill,
Was science in the middle east institutionalised?

Dear friend:

When you read astronomy as a science, it is without religion and culture. It`s pure science. But when you consider astronomy in historical perspective, there is room for religion and culture in it. Wishing you well,

Mohammad Gill

Dear Dr Gill
My point or contention is that while it is alright to be proud of one`s heritage, one can not put science in religious compartments. Mayans or Egyptians made great advances in some fields. If I need feel happy about what Egyptians did with their pyramid, I should do that with trying to say that `oh they are of so and so religion and I am also from so religion, and that`s why I am happy`

Of course everyone is free to find his own reason for feeling proud of something..)

I am out of this discussion now.. thanks for listening

Dear friend:

Unfortunately I failed to see your point.

I was not talking in my article of any aboriginal scientists; I talked about Ibn-al-Shatir, al-Tusi, al-Haitham, Ibn-al-Rushd, etc. Of them al-Tusi was Iranian and others were Arab but all of them were Muslims and none of them changed his faith. So if I called them Muslim, it was not a wrong statement. There was nothing more to it.

Religion if used negatively is reprehensible. Professor Salam (Nobel laureate in physics) was proud he was a Muslim (in the broad sense; I do not want to start a debate on Ahmadism here), so is Professor Ahmad Zewail (another Muslim Nobel laureate, in chemistry) and there are several other prominent living Muslim scientists also. Some of them draw inspiration from their faith, others don’t.

I was inspired to write this article by a paper, “Islamic Astronomy,” by Harvard professor Owen Gingerich and by Howard Turner’s book, “Science in Medieval Islam.” I felt a natural bond with Ibn-al-Shatir and al-Tusi whose work they applauded. These Muslim scientists are my progenitors. There is nothing wrong with discovering one’s heritage, cherishing it and writing about it. I am not much of a believing and practicing Muslim myself but I have roots in Islam. I am not ashamed of it. Vivek also clarified this point in his post.

I have roots in the subcontinent also and do not miss a chance to adulate the sub-continental scientists. This is quite natural. My own professional career was built on the works of the western scientists and engineers and some of them provided invaluable guidance to me. I appreciate them too. Science is unifying and not divisive.

Jang and vereesh:

Unfortunately, I have no personal experience of sailing. Your feedbacks are interesting but I cannot add anything to them. Thanks for your positive views.

Mohammad Gill

Vivek
Einstein`s example is a good one. Can we divide today`s astronomy in compartments of christian astronomy and Jew astonomy. Should Chandrasekhar be trated as an achievement of hindu astronomy? Or Ramanujan`s mathematics feat as something belonging to hindu mathematics?

Somehow, I am not able to understand this concept of boxing science within context of religion.

There is enough data that survived various European and subsequently American cleansing to leave more than ample room to re-confirm that much of what we call astronomy and therein the linkages to navigation emerged from ``Al-Hind`` and the environs therein. If we take ``Al Hind`` to encompass most lands between, say, Aden on one side and Cochin-China (Vietnam) on the other, and extend it to the ports and coasts of much of Africa.

Whether these were Muslim, Hindu or Buddhist is better understood when we go walk about in the islands of the Pacific Ocean. Especially the ones between Australasia and Asia.

Or for that matter, even the observatories in Jaipur, Delhi, Ujjain and elsewhere. No one religion can lay claim to the science that went into setting them up.

Similar records on these sciences were reputed to have filled the libraries of Africa before the dawn of European civilisation. Again, the religion was not very clear or relevant.

Did Vasco de Gama and Christopher Columbus use navigators from our part of the world? Well, records in kerala and Goa suggest that Vasco de Gama sure did, apparently picking them up from what is today known as Angola.

And more . . .

friend,
Religion is one of the things that humans identify themselves with. There is nothing wrong with the term ``muslim astrologers`` just like nothing`s wrong with Einstien being called a Jew. I don`t think Mr.Gill means that individual achievements are due to religion, but that these achievers can be classified together as belonging to a common religion.

Gillsaab

I have a few friends in sailing community, and they clearly see a strong link in science and sea-faring. Sea going folks were one of the highest demanders of applied science from astronomy to use of pulleys to weather and geography. they were always using small crew, as a result needed gadgets to accompish tasks. overall, they seem to have (even today) contempt forland-lubbers. land based farming communities on the other hand were traditionalists and feudal. manpower and hierarchichal control was always cheap way of accomplishing tasks. so they evolved feudal and caste based systems (my belief), and had little use for applied science except for military campaigns, but even here, manpower was always plentiful.

revival in europe for marcantile seafaring activity beyong calm medeiterrenean among the prtuguese, spanish , dutch etc was the strongest imepetus for applied science demand. contrast that with the ottomans, who had relatively little interest as they were status-quo land based overlord society. same is the reason for interest among the arabs since they were the seafaring traders of earlier times.

Dr Gill
Religion is something that can be changed. Can a aborginal christian living in Australia benefit from or bask in the glory of progress made by Swedish scientists because of ``christian science``? How can science be bound to a religion? IMHO, progress of science generally gets localized to regions where enough brilliant minds are available to stimulate each other. If religion is directly responsible for stimulating scientific progress than Laos, being a buddhist country, would have resulted of similar scientific progress as Japan.

Let us consider an example, though not in field of science
A R Rahman is a great music director. He was a hindu that converted to Muslim religion when he was in his twenties. Is his achievement due to his religion (which one)? or is it due to overall stimulation he got in South India that has a strong tradition of cultural activities?

Beejay : ``why the subcontinent has produced so little original scientific thought``

read Jared Diamond`s `guns germs and steel. maybe itll make things clearer.

Gill, you being a freethinker seem a little too defensive and apologetic. Please, they don`t throw people in the bin for science anymore, so relax. And for heavens sakes, enough of how great us Muslims were when we gave a shite about science. I respect what you say and how you say it, but let`s have a piece on what science means to Muslims today, apart from our obsession with Dr. Qadeer. That`s mad science.

Dear friend:

Many (probably most) scientists who are generally called Arab were not really Arabs although they wrote in Arabic (Arabic was the lingua franca at that time); they were Iranians. Ibn-al-Shatir was an Arab though. Tusi who founded Maragha observatory was an Iranian. I called them Muslims because they were Muslims. Even if Islam disappears as you think, they will still be known as Muslims. I have Islamic heritage and by writing this article, I tried to trace my scientific roots. I did not overblow the Muslim achievements; in fact all the source material that I quoted in the article is of non-Muslims`. There is nothing wrong in it.

Wishing you well,

Mohammad Gill

Dear Dr Gill Saheb,
Nice informatory article on history.. However I have a small issue with identifying achievements with religion. Perhaps Ibn-al-shatir`s achievement should be considered an arab achievement.

Religion of Egyptian pharaohs has disappeared. Islam may also disappear after 4000 years. Will Ibn-al-shatir still be identified by his religion?

Dear Dr. Gill,

Just to clarify, my #1 was a “funny” response. You can stop shaking with fear – I have no intention of chasing you with a stick – or any other tool of violence (I am a peace lover (not a peacenik, though)). In seriousness, I think your article was quite good for the limited objectives that you were shooting for.

About the other issue, I really hope you will not restrict your search to just India – but cover the whole subcontinent – the cultural similarities far exceed the superficial differences (in my opinion). In view of the seriousness that I attach to it, I hope you will REALLY take the time that this topic deserves, and dig a LOT deeper and longer than wikipedia! I have a feeling it will be a worthwhile effort – especially for a site like this. (I wish I could find the time necessary to do such a project myself. If you wish me to review (prior to publishing) anything, or be of any other assistance, I’ll be very happy to help in any way I can. My e-mail address (not for the faint-hearted) is CD.LION@gmail.com. I also have another hotmail address, but it is likely to disappear soon.)

Thanks for all the positive things you try to accomplish on this site!

Sincerely,
BeeJay.

Dear BeeJay:

This was a trial article. I might do a more comprehensive article on this subject if I found the time.

As to both ``yes`` and ``no``, I thought I had explained the rationale for that situation in the article. The answer is yes, because the mathematics and the model that Copernicus used in his book was based on the work of the preceding Muslim astronomer(s), particularly Ibn-al-Shatir, even though he placed the stationary sun at the center (helionentric system) and the Muslim work used the Ptolemaic stationary Earth system. The answer was no because the Muslim astronomers didn`t use helioentric system which was the basis of the susbsequent Copernican revolution althugh Copernicus did not create it. For Copernican revolution, the credit goes to Galileo and Kepler.

Toby Huff wrote in his book ``The Rise of Early Modern Science``, ``The Arab astronomers and mathematicians working in the Maragha observatory in western Iran, and especially the Damascene timekeeper Ibn-al-Shatir (d.1375), had improved the Ptolemaic system so that it was mathematically equivalent to the Copernican system (though still geocentric). Or more accurately stated, the planetary models of Copernicus, appearing 150 years after the time of Ibn-al-Shatir, are actually duplicates of the models developed by the Maragha astronomers.``

About your comment as to the scaricity of scientific developments in India, I think, the main reason is probably our own ignorance of such works. According to Wikipedia, ``In the 5th century AD (apparently independent of Aristarchus), the Indian astronomer Aryabhata also proposed a heliocentric universe. As his work was not translated into Latin until after Copernicus had written De revolutionibus..., his theories were apparently unknown in the West.`` I am presently digging into the source material pertaining to Arab astronomers; I`ll start looking for sources identifying Indian contributions afterwards. Aryabhata is said to have also contributed to algebra but the greatest contribution in algebra was the use of symbols which is due to Arab mathematicians. They used ``la (nothing or unknown)`` and the western mathematicians started using ``x`` for ``la.`` It is a shame that most of us are unaware of our heritage; even for this knowledge we have to go to the western sources.

Wishing you well,

Mohammad Gill

My dearest Dr. Gill.

This one did not shape out like they mostly do! You kept the topic too narrow, did some half-hearted pretend fishing around and finally ended the article with a really cautious remark (what’s the matter – you don’t feel young, brash, and bold any more, or did all that poking around Einstein’s love life leave you with a sense of having missed out on too much?)– all of which leaves the reader almost as befuddled at the end as in the beginning – enough to make the average reader cringe with revulsion, light up in anger, and become mad enough to chase the author with a stick – for playing a cat-and-mouse game with the reader. (Not me, though! (Please note that certain readers are not to be mistaken for the “average” reader by a long shot (in fact, this janitor is so far below the average that he doesn’t even register on the scale.)))

I am still waiting for that article from you about why the subcontinent has produced so little original scientific thought (and don’t give me that cop-out answer consisting of highlighting those few-and-far-between luminaries – it will not work – a few “mashaals” here and there don’t light up the skies! Why is the ROAD so dark?) – and is there a possible connections to the way we bring them up?

Note:
[The answer is probably both yes and no.]
Maybe so (which is probably a better answer), but as far as YOUR answers are concerned, I think the politicians have beaten you to it – a long time ago, and on all topics!