November 16, 2012 § 3 Comments
I know that God answers our prayers in another way, if we pray to him with our whole hearts, with love, faith and patience: during my childhood I was a sinner for many years, I neither thought of the work of God nor prayed to him; I made many sinful acts that rational nature forbids; because of my sins I fell into a trap from which man cannot free himself [by himself;] I began to be despondent and the terror of death overcame me. At that time I turned to God and I began to pray to him that he free me, for he knows all the ways of salvation. I said to God: “I repudiate my sin and I search for your will, O Lord, that I may accomplish it. But now forgive me my sin and free me.” I prayed for many days with all my heart; God heard me and saved me completely; I for my part praised him and wholeheartedly turned to him. And I said Psalm CXIV [116:1]: “I love! For God listens to my entreaty.” I thought that this psalm was written for me. I then said: “No, I shall not die, I shall live to recite the deeds of God.”
There are people who constantly accused me in the presence of the king and said: “This man is your enemy, and the enemy of the Frang;” and I knew that the king’s wrath was inflamed against me. One day the king’s messenger came to me, and said: “Come quickly to me; thus spoke the king.” I was very much frightened, but I could not flee, because the king’s men were guarding me. I prayed the whole night with a grieved heart; in the morning I rose and went up to the king. But God had made his heart soft, he received me well and mentioned nothing of the things I was afraid of. He only questioned me on many points concerning the doctrine and the [sacred] Books and he said to me: “You are a learned man, you should love the Frang, because they are very learned.” I answered: “Yes, they truly are;” for I was afraid and the Frang are really learned. After this the king gave me five measures of gold, and sent me away peacefully. After leaving [the king,] as I was still marvelling [at my fate,] I thanked God who had treated me so well. When Walda Yohannes accused me, I ran away, but I did not pray as before that [God] rescue me from the peril, because I was able to flee; man ought to do everything possible without tempting God needlessly. Now I praise Him; because I fled and am now living in a cave, I find ample opportunity to turn myself wholly to my creator; I am able to think of those things which eluded me previously and to know the truth that gives great joy to my soul. And I say to God: “I deserved the affliction which made me know your judgement.” I have learnt more while living alone in a cave than when I was living with scholars. What I wrote in this book is very little; but in my cave I have meditated on many other such things. I praise God for the wisdom he gave me and the knowledge of the mysteries of creation; my soul is drawn by him and despises everything except the meditation of God’s work and of his wisdom.
Everyday I recited the Psalter of David with a heart dilated [with joy;] and this prayer helps me considerably and raises my thoughts to God. And when in the Psalter of David I encounter things that do not agree with my thought, I interpret them and I try to make them agree with my science and all is well. While praying in this manner, my trust in God grew stronger. And I said: “God, hear my prayer, do not hide from my petition. Save me from the violence of men. For your part, Lord, do not withhold your kindness from me! May your love and faithfulness constantly preserve me. I invoke you, O Lord; do not let me be disgraced. So I shall always sing of your name, that day after day you will fulfil my desire. Turn to me and pity me. Give me your strength, your saving help, to me your servant, this son of a pious mother, give me one proof of your goodness. For the sake of your name, guide me, lead me! Rescue me from my persecutors, for the goodness you show me. Let dawn bring proof of your love, for one who relies on you. Protect me and lead me into the land, do not let me fall into the hands of my enemies. Let me hear [your] joy and exultation; do take away my hope. Counter their curses with your blessing, and let them know that you have done it.” I was praying day and night with all my heart this and other similar prayers.
This chapter is more autobiography and testimony than philosophy, but I have a few remarks nevertheless.
The first paragraph, in which Zera Yacob says that sin can bind us so that we can no longer free ourselves from its influence, and that we then require God’s intervention, and that God did so intervene in his life, is reminiscent of Augustine’s account of his conversion in Book VIII of the Confessions:
For the law of sin is the violence of custom [i.e. habituation], whereby the mind is drawn and holden, even against its will; but deservedly, for that it willingly fell into it. Who then should deliver me thus wretched from the body of this death, but Thy grace only, through Jesus Christ our Lord? (VIII.v.12)
I cast myself down I know not how, under a certain fig-tree, giving full vent to my tears; and the floods of mine eyes gushed out an acceptable sacrifice to Thee. And, not indeed in these words, yet to this purpose,
spake I much unto Thee: and Thou, O Lord, how long? how long, Lord, wilt Thou be angry for ever? Remember not our former iniquities, for I felt that I was held by them. I sent up these sorrowful words: How long, how long, “to-morrow, and tomorrow?” Why not now? why not is there this hour an end to my uncleanness?
So was I speaking and weeping in the most bitter contrition of my heart, when, lo! I heard from a neighbouring house a voice, as of boy or girl, I know not, chanting, and oft repeating, “Take up and read; Take up and read. ” Instantly, my countenance altered, I began to think most intently whether children were wont in any kind of play to sing such words: nor could I remember ever to have heard the like. So checking the torrent of my tears, I arose; interpreting it to be no other than a command from God to open the book, and read the first chapter I should find. For I had heard of Antony, that coming in during the reading of the Gospel, he received the admonition, as if what was being read was spoken to him: Go, sell all that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven, and come and follow me: and by such oracle he was forthwith converted unto Thee. Eagerly then I returned to the place where Alypius was sitting; for there had I laid the volume of the Apostle when I arose thence. I seized, opened, and in silence read that section on which my eyes first fell: Not in rioting and drunkenness, not in chambering and wantonness, not in strife and envying; but put ye on the Lord Jesus Christ, and make not provision for the flesh, in concupiscence. No further would I read; nor needed I: for instantly at the end of this sentence, by a light as it were of serenity infused into my heart, all the darkness of doubt vanished away. (VIII.xii.28–29)
“What I wrote in this book is very little; but in my cave I have meditated on many other such things.” I always this this passage is so tragic—if only Zera Yacob had written more!
The final paragraph contains a whole series of quotations or paraphrases from the Psalms: 55:1; 40:11; 31:17; 61:8; 86:16–17; 31:4; 142:6–7; 143:8; 109:27–8. Looking at the sources, I’m reminded of Paul’s manner of quoting in his letters: the quotes are not exact, and are drawn from various places and then joined or fused together. In other words, Zera Yacob, like Paul, is drawing at will on his profound knowledge of scripture rather than looking things up. (But I should say that it’s hard for me to judge the accuracy of Zera Yacob’s quotations very well, since some of the apparent discrepancies may have to do with translation or variations in manuscripts.)
It is particularly clear in this chapter that, although he is not a Christian, Zera Yacob is a devout man.
Back to chapter VIII.
November 10, 2012 § Leave a Comment
The will of God is known by this short statement from our reason that tells us: Worship God your creator and love all men as yourself. Moreover our reason says: Do not do unto others that which you do not like to be done to you, but do unto others as you would like others to do unto you. The decalogue of the Pentateuch expresses the will of the creator excepting [the precept] about the observance of the Sabbath, for our reason says nothing of the observance of the Sabbath. But the prohibitions of killing, stealing, lying, adultery: our reason teaches us these and similar ones. Likewise the six precepts of the Gospel are the will of the creator. For indeed we desire that men show mercy to us; it therefore is fitting that we ourselves show the [same] mercy to the others, as much as it is within our power. It is the will of God that we keep our life and existence in this world. It is by the will of the creator that we come into and remain in this Life, and it is not right for us to leave it against his holy will. The creator himself wills that we adorn our life with science and work; for such an end did he give us reason and power. Manual labour comes from the will of God because without it the necessities of our life cannot be fulfilled. Likewise marriage of one man with one woman and education of children.
Moreover there are many other things which agree with our reason and are necessary for our life or for the existence of mankind. We ought to observe them, because such is the will of our creator, and we ought to know that God does not create us perfect but creates us with such a reason as to know that we are to strive for perfection as long as we live in this world, and to be worthy for the reward that our creator has prepared for us in his wisdom. It was possible for God to have created us perfect and to make us enjoy beatitude on earth; but he did not will to create us in this way; instead he created us with the capacity of striving for perfection, and placed us in the midst of the trials of this world so that we may become perfect and deserve the reward that our creator will give us after our death; as long as we live in this world we ought to praise our creator and fulfil his will and be patient until he draws us unto him, and beg from his mercy that he will lessen our period of hardship and forgive our sins and faults which we committed through ignorance; and enable us to know the laws of our creator and to keep them.
Now as to prayer, we always stand in need of it because [our] rational nature requires it. The soul endowed with intelligence that is aware that there is a God who knows all, conserves all, rules all, is drawn to him so that it prays to him and asks him to grant things good and to be freed from evil and sheltered under the hand of him who is almighty and for whom nothing is impossible, God great and sublime who sees all that is [above and] beneath him, holds all, teaches all, guides all, our Father, our creator, our Protector, the reward for our souls, merciful, kind, who knows each of our misfortunes, takes pleasure in our patience, creates us for life and not for destruction, as the wise Solomon said: “You, Lord, teach all things, because you can do all things and overlook men’s sins so that they can repent. You love all that exists, you hold nothing of what you have made in abhorrence, you are indulgent and merciful to all” [Wisdom 11:23–25]. God created us intelligent so that we may meditate on his greatness, praise him and pray to him in order to obtain the needs of our body and soul. Our reason which our creator has put in the heart of man teaches all these things to us. How can they be useless and false?
is “worship God your creator and love all men as yourself” really a precept of reason? Zera Yacob offered an argument for the existence of God back in chapter III. And in chapter IV he briefly addressed the further matter of worship:
He is intelligent who understands all, for he created us as intelligent from the abundance of his intelligence; and we ought to worship him, for he is the master of all things. If we pray to him, he will listen to us; for he is almighty.
And what about the Golden Rule? Jesus taught it, but I am not so sure about reason, and I would like more of an argument there. Empathy and mutual aid are natural, certainly, but so are vengeance and rivalry.
I’ve talked before about how there are lots of good rules that are not deliverances of pure reason, and I think observance of the Sabbath is another good example. Unlike murder and theft, observing the Sabbath is only required because God tells us to do it. It’s like taking out the trash as a kid—you only have to do it if your parents tell you to. Still, you do have to do it if they tell you to, and likewise we’re supposed to observe the Sabbath, not because we’re told to do so by reason, but because we’re told to do so by God. Moreover, it’s good that he told us to do that. If everyone else works seven days a week, then it’s pretty hard to take one day off yourself. But if God (or any other authority) makes everyone take a day off, then great! Everyone gets a day off.
The following is an interesting passage, because it raises a question about how Zera Yacob understands the relationship between what we should do, what reason tells us, and what God wills:
But the prohibitions of killing, stealing, lying, adultery: our reason teaches us these and similar ones. Likewise the six precepts of the Gospel are the will of the creator. For indeed we desire that men show mercy to us; it therefore is fitting that we ourselves show the [same] mercy to the others, as much as it is within our power. It is the will of God that we keep our life and existence in this world. It is by the will of the creator that we come into and remain in this Life, and it is not right for us to leave it against his holy will.
Zera Yacob evidently thinks that whatever reason reveals to be right, God wills—perhaps because reason simply reveals the will of God? In the last chapter, Zera Yacob referred to “the will of the creator revealed through the light of reason,” and see also the first sentence of the present chapter. The last sentence of this quote may suggest that, ultimately, we should do things precisely because God wills that we do them; indeed just below Zera Yacob says that “We ought to observe [things which agree with our reason], because such is the will of our creator.” As Plato observed in the Euthyphro, there must be some reason why God commands one thing rather than another, so it cannot simply be that we should do things merely because God says so. On the other hand, and as I pointed out just above, God, like a parent, can make certain things obligatory in virtue of his authority. Maybe that’s all Zera Yacob is getting at in the last line above: it is wrong to abandon the life your creator gave you in the same way that you could be said to wrong your parents by committing suicide. But on the whole it is a shame that Zera Yacob does not say more about what we would now call moral epistemology and metaethics; probably we must just accept that he has not really worked out a theory on such matters.
Regarding manual labour, we may note that in Ethiopia, as in many ancient and medieval societies, manual labour and technical trades were looked down on.
In the second paragraph, Zera Yacob offers a brief theodicy (a “justification of the ways of God to man,” in Milton’s words). God could have made us perfect, but did not do so because he wanted us to perfect ourselves and deserve our blessedness. As usual, Zera Yacob doesn’t develop the idea in detail, but in contemporary philosophy of religion, this is known as a “soul-making theodicy.”
September 25, 2012 § Leave a Comment
There’s a brand new book out on Zera Yacob: The Ethics of Zär’a Ya’eqob, by Dawit Worku Kidane. You can read the introduction on Google Books. It looks pretty interesting. As the title implies, it seems to focus on the moral philosophy. But it also seems to have some pretty substantial discussion of the historical and cultural setting. Also, it offers a brand new English translation of the Treatise (I think only of Zera Yacob’s and not Walda Heywat’s, but I’m not certain about that), which is great, since it’s only the second complete English translation of the Treatise, and Sumner’s stuff is all out of print.
If anyone has looked at this book, please let me know. If you can send me some comments, I’ll happily post them here.
September 11, 2012 § Leave a Comment
I was recently rereading an essay on Walda Heywat that I started some time back, and it contained a pretty nice passage (if I may say so myself) on chapter VII of Zera Yacob’s Treatise, which I posted last week. I reproduce it below.
* * *
Zera Yacob is so confident of God’s providence that it figures in a argument for life after death. It’s clear that there is another life, he says,
for in this world our desire is not fulfilled: those in need desire to possess, those who possess desire more, and though man owned the whole world, he is not satisfied and craves for more. This inclination of our nature shows us that we are created not only for this life, but also for the coming world.
Moreover justice in this world is imperfect, and “therefore there must needs be another life and another justice.” The fact that Zera Yacob would argue that there must be another life on the basis of a recognition of God’s providence shows how far he is from a deep concern with evil as a philosophical problem. We see here again that “the goodness of the created thing” is a basic assumption in Zera Yacob’s thought: the insatiability of our desires is not a sign of corruptness, nor a cause for despair, nor a reason to try to extirpate them. Our natural drives are to be embraced and if there is no obvious satisfaction for them here then it must be available elsewhere.
September 10, 2012 § Leave a Comment
I just discovered this obituary for Claude Sumner in SJ Africa News:
Fr Claude Sumner (AOR – GLC)
Born: 10 July 1919
Entered SJ: 14 August 1939
Ordained: 29. June 1951
Final Vows: 15 August 1955
Died: 24 June 2012
Fr Claude Sumner of Eastern Africa Province (applied to French Canada) died on 24th June, 2012, in his community of Notre-Dame de Richelieu in Montreal at the age of 92 after 72 years as a Jesuit.
Fr Sumner worked for many years in Ethiopia. He taught at the University of Addis Ababa and was a pioneer in work on African Philosophy.
There would be nothing whatever on Ethiopian philosophy in English without Claude Sumner (the posts I’ve been putting up on this blog are his translations, with my own commentary added). And I’m sure a lot could be said about his influence in other languages, too.
Like myself, Claude Sumner was a Canadian who fell in love with Ethiopia. I spent a summer in Ethiopia back in 2002, and dropped by the philosophy department at Addis Ababa University in hopes of meeting him. But he was back in Vancouver, my own home town, so I missed him. I could never even find an email address for him, but I suppose I could have tracked him down if I’d really tried. Not in this life-time, now.
* * *
Update: here is a longer obituary in French.
September 10, 2012 § Leave a Comment
I’ve started making a small effort to improve the Wikipedia articles related to Ethiopian philosophy. Given how difficult it is to find anything online, this seems like a worthwhile enterprise. So far I’ve mainly been building up the bibliographies a bit. Perhaps others will join me?
The obvious pages already exist: Ethiopian Philosophy, Zera Yacob, Walda Heywat, Hatata, Claude Sumner. ‘Ethiopian Philosophy’ and ‘Zera Yacob’ are in the best shape, but they could all use a fair bit of work. And should there be more articles?
September 3, 2012 § Leave a Comment
I said to myself: “Why does God permit liars to mislead his people?” God has indeed given reason to all and everyone so that they may know truth and falsehood, and the power to choose between the two as they will. Hence if it is truth we want, let us seek it with our reason which God has given us so that with it we may see that which is needed for us from among all the necessities of nature. We cannot, however, reach truth through the doctrine of men, for all men are liars. If on the contrary we prefer falsehood, the order of the creator and the natural law imposed on the whole of nature do not perish thereby, but we ourselves perish by our own error.
God sustains the world by his order which he himself has established and which man cannot destroy, because the order of God is stronger than the order of men. Therefore those who believe that monastic life is superior to marriage are they themselves drawn to marriage because of [the might of] the order of the creator; those who believe that fasting brings righteousness to their soul, eat when they feel hungry, and those who believe that he who has given up his goods is perfect, are drawn to seek them again on account of their usefulness, as many of our monks have done. Likewise all liars would like to break the order of nature: but it is not possible that they do not see their lie broken down. But the creator laughs at them, the Lord of creation derides them. God knows the right way to act, but the sinner is caught in the snare set by himself. Hence a monk who holds the order of marriage as impure will he caught in the snare of fornication and of other carnal sins against nature and of grave sickness. Those who despise riches will show their hypocrisy in the presence of kings and of wealthy persons in order to acquire these goods. Those who desert their relatives for the sake of God lack temporal assistance in times of difficulty and in their old age; they begin to blame God and men and to blaspheme. Likewise all those who violate the law of the creator fall into the trap made by their own hands. God permits error and evil among men because our souls in this world live in a land of temptation, in which the chosen ones of God are put to the test, as the wise Solomon said: “God has put the virtuous to the test and proved them worthy to be with him; he has tested them like gold in a furnace, and accepted them as a holocaust.” After our death, when we go back to our creator, we shall see how God made all things in justice and great wisdom and that all his ways are truthful and upright.
It is clear that our soul lives after the death of our flesh, for in this world our desire [for happiness] is not fulfilled: those in need desire to possess, those who possess desire more, and though man owned the whole world, he is not satisfied and craves for more. This inclination of our nature shows us that we are created not only for this life, but also for the coming world; there the souls which have fulfilled the will of the creator will be perpetually satisfied and will not look for other things. Without this [inclination] the nature of man would be deficient and would not obtain that of which it has the greatest need. Our soul has the power of having the concept of God and of seeing him mentally; likewise it can conceive of immortality. God did not give this power purposelessly; as he gave the power, so did he give the reality. In this world complete justice is not achieved: wicked people are in possession of the goods of this world in a satisfying degree, the humble starve; some wicked men are happy, some good men are sad, some evil men exult with joy; some righteous men weep. Therefore after our death there must needs be another life and another justice, a perfect one, in which retribution will be made to all according to their deeds, and those who have fulfilled the will of the creator revealed through the light of reason and have observed the law of their nature will be rewarded. The law of nature is obvious, because our reason clearly propounds it, if we examine it. But men do not like such inquiries; they choose to believe in the words of men rather than to investigate the will of their creator.
The opening of this chapter is reminiscent of Romans 1:18–25:
For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth. For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse, for although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened. Claiming to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man and birds and animals and creeping things. Therefore God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, to the dishonouring of their bodies among themselves, because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever!
In my comment on chapter VI, I already talked about Zera Yacob’s optimistic view of human reason. Again he is too optimistic here. Besides the limits on our time and intellect, we are built to deceive ourselves, especially in moral matters, and the truth will often elude us despite our best efforts.
In this chapter Zera Yacob also seems overly optimistic about our natural inclinations. He argues here that our natural drives reveal the folly of ascetecism, but even non-ascetics feel temptation. Maybe it’s foolish not to marry if that is only going to lead you to use prostitutes, but married men are also tempted to stray, and that does not mean that monogamy is folly. (Well, some cynics will say that it does mean that, but Zera Yacob wouldn’t.) Life is hard, and even the upstanding face trials, as Zera Yacob himself here insists: “the chosen ones of God are put to the test.”
However, I’m perhaps being a bit unfair. Zera Yacob has already argued against asceticism and various other things in earlier chapters. So maybe in this chapter he’s just pointing to some consequences of going wrong in these areas. That would be perfectly fair.
Zera Yacob’s argument for life after death depends upon the point that life is hard, even for the just: “It is clear that our soul lives after the death of our flesh, for in this world our desire is not fulfilled.” This is a fairly famous argument now, because C. S. Lewis made it in Mere Christianity:
The longings which arise in us when we first fall in love, or first think of some foreign country, or first take up some subject that excites us, are longings which no marriage, no travel, no learning, can really satisfy. I am not now speaking of what would be ordinarily called unsuccessful marriages, or holidays, or learned careers. I am speaking of the best possible ones. There was something we grasped at, in that first moment of longing, which just fades away in the reality. I think everyone knows what I mean. The wife may be a good wife, and the hotels and scenery may have been excellent, and chemistry may be a very interesting job: but something has evaded us.
The Christian says, “Creatures are not born with desires unless satisfaction for those desires exists. A baby feels hunger well, there is such a thing as food. A duckling wants to swim: well, there is such a thing as water. Men feel sexual desire: well, there is such a thing as sex. If I find in myself a desire which no experience in this world can satisfy, the most probable explanation is that I was made for another world. If none of my earthly pleasures satisfy it, that does not prove that the universe is a fraud. Probably earthly pleasures were never meant to satisfy it, but only to arouse it, to suggest the real thing. If that is so, I must take care, on the one hand, never to despise, or be unthankful for, these earthly blessings, and on the other, never to mistake them for the something else of which they are only a kind of copy, or echo, or mirage.
But the argument isn’t a good one, at least not after Darwin. It’s very natural that we would have restless desires, because going for more is generally safer than just settling for less. The more women you sleep with, the more children you can leave behind. And so on. Also, it would be absurd to imagine that all our our desires might be satisfied after death. I’m sure the reader will be able to think of some desires of his own that he would not expect God to satisfy.
But some people do feel, with Zera Yacob, that ”after our death there must needs be another life and another justice, a perfect one, in which retribution will be made to all according to their deeds.” Some people think that if there were not, then life would be absurd. For example, William Lane Craig claims that
if God does not exist and there is no immortality, then all the evil acts of men go unpunished and all the sacrifices of good men go unrewarded. But who can live with such a view?
I’m not totally unsympathetic to this, but I’m not all that impressed by it, either. For one thing, even if the fact that the evil thrive and the good suffer is a paradox of moral life, it is only one among several (the most famous is moral luck), and it is not clear to me that God or eternal life makes any difference to many of them. There just seem to be some paradoxes lurking in human thought generally, and in moral thought in particular. In fact religion can introduce new puzzles: the problem of evil is at least as difficult as the idea that there might not be perfect justice.
I’ve added further (and more sympathetic) comments on chapter VII here.