LAZ̤Ā (لظى‎). “Fire, flame.” A division, or stage in hell, mentioned in the Qurʾān, Sūrah lxx. 15. Al-Bag͟hawī, the commentator, says it is that portion of hell which is reserved for the Christians who have not believed in Muḥammad. [HELL.]

LAZARUS. Arabic al-ʿĀzar (العازر‎). Not mentioned by name in the Qurʾān, but Jalālu ʾd-dīn, in remarking on Sūrah iii. 43: “I will bring the dead to life by God’s permission,” says, amongst those whom Jesus raised from the dead was al-ʿĀzar, who was his special friend and companion. The account given by the commentators al-Kamālān of the raising of Lazarus, is very similar to that given in the New Testament.

LEASE. Arabic ijārah (اجارة‎). [HIRE.]

LEBANON. Arabic Lubnān (لبنان‎). Not mentioned in the Qurʾān, but tradition has it that Ishmael collected the stones for the Kaʿbah from five sacred mountains, one of which was Mount Libanus. The followers of Ismāʿīlu ʾd-Darāzī, known as the Druzes, a fanatical sect of Muslims, reside on the southern range of the Lebanon chain. [DRUZES.]

LEGACY. [WILLS.]

LEGITIMACY. Waladu ʾl-ḥalāl (ولد الحلال‎), “a legitimate child”; waladu ʾz-zināʾ (ولد الزناء‎), “an illegitimate child.”

The Muḥammadan law, unlike the law of England, makes legitimacy depend, not merely upon the fact of the child being born in “lawful wedlock,” but also conceived after lawful marriage.

According to the Sunnīs and Shīʿahs, and according to the teaching of the Qurʾān itself, the shortest period of gestation recognised by law is six months, and consequently a child born any time after six months from the date of marriage has a claim to legitimacy. Amongst the Sunnīs, a simple denial of the paternity of the child so born would not take away its status of legitimacy. But the Shīʿahs hold that if a man get a woman with child and then marry her, and she give birth to the child within six months after marriage, legitimacy is not established.

As to the longest period of pregnancy, there are some strange rulings in Muslim law. The Shīʿahs, upon the basis of a decision pronounced by ʿAlī, recognise ten lunar months as the longest period of gestation, and this is now regarded as the longest legal period by both Shīʿahs and Sunnīs. But Abū Ḥanīfah and his two disciples, upon the authority of a tradition reported by ʿĀyishah, regard two years as the longest period of gestation, and the Imām ash-Shāfiʿī extended it to four, and the Imām Mālik to five and even seven years! It is said these Sunnī doctors based their opinions on the legendary birth of Zuhak Tāzi and others, who were born, so it is related, in the fourth year of conception! But Muslim divines say that the old jurisconsults of the Sunnī school were actuated by a sentiment of humanity, and not by any indifference as to the laws of nature, their chief desire being to prevent an abuse of the provisions of the law regarding divorce and the disavowal of children. The general consensus of Muslim doctors points to ten months as the longest period of pregnancy which can be recognised by any court of justice.

[Under the old Roman law, it was ten months. In the Code Napoleon, article 312, it is three hundred days. Under the Jewish law, the husband had the absolute right of disavowal. See Code Rabbinique, vol. ii. p. 63.]

The Muḥammadan law, like the English law, does not recognise the legitimation of antenuptial children. Whereas, according to French and Scotch law, such children are legitimated by the subsequent marriage of the parents.

In Sunnī law, an invalid marriage does not affect the legitimacy of children born from it. Nor does it in Shīʿah law; but the Shīʿah law demands proof that such a marriage was a bona fide one, whilst the Ḥanafī code is not strict on this point.

In the case of a divorce by liʿān [LIʿAN], the waladu ʾl-mulāʿanah, or “child of imprecation,” is cut off from his right of inheritance from his father.

(See Syud Ameer Ali’s Personal Law of Muhammadans, p. 160; Fatāwā-i-ʿAlamgīrī, p. 210; Sharāʾiʿu ʾl-Islām, p. 301.) [PARENTAGE.]

LETTERS. The letters of Muslims are distinguished by several peculiarities, dictated by the rule of politeness. “The paper is thick, white, and highly polished; sometimes it is ornamented with flowers of gold; and the edges are always cut straight with scissors. The upper half is generally left blank; and the writing never occupies any portion of the second side. The name of the person to whom the letter is addressed, when the writer is an inferior or an equal, and even in some other cases, commonly occurs in the first sentence, preceded by several titles of honour; and is often written a little above the line to which it appertains, the space beneath it in that line being left blank; sometimes it is written in letters of gold, or red ink. A king, writing to a subject, or a great man to a dependant, usually places his name and seal at the head of his letter. The seal is the impression of a signet (generally a ring, worn on the little finger of the right hand), upon which is engraved the name of the person, commonly accompanied by the word ‘His (i.e. God’s) servant,’ or some other words expressive of trust in God, &c. Its impression is considered more valid than the sign-manual, and is indispensable to give authority to the letter. It is made by dabbing some ink on the surface of the signet, and pressing this upon the paper: the place which is to be stamped being first moistened, by touching the tongue with a finger of the right hand, and then gently rubbing the part with that finger. A person writing to a superior, or to an equal, or even an inferior to whom he wishes to show respect, signs his name at the bottom of his letter, next the left side or corner, and places the seal immediately to the right of this; but if he particularly desire to testify his humility, he places it beneath his name, or even partly over the lower edge of the paper, which consequently does not receive the whole of the impression.” (Lane’s Arabian Nights, vol. i. p. 23.)

LIʿĀN (لعان‎). Lit. “Mutual cursing.” A form of divorce which takes place under the following circumstances. “If a man accuses his wife of adultery, and does not prove it by four witnesses, he must swear before God that he is the teller of truth four times, and then add: ‘If I am a liar, may God curse me.’ The wife then says four times, ‘I swear before God that my husband lies’; and then adds: ‘May God’s anger be upon me if this man be a teller of truth.’ After this a divorce takes place ipso facto.” (See Sūratu ʾn-Nūr, xxiv. 6; Mishkāt, book xiii. ch. xv.).

In the case of Liʿān, as in the other forms of divorce, the woman can claim her dower.

Liʿān is not allowed in four cases, viz. a Christian woman married to a Muslim, a Jewess married to a Muslim, a free woman married to a slave, and a slave girl married to a free man.

The children of a woman divorced by Liʿān are illegitimate.

LIBĀS (لباس‎). [APPAREL.]

LIBERALITY. Arabic sak͟hāwah (سخاوة‎), “hospitality”; infāq (انفاق‎), “general liberality in everything.”

Liberality is specially commended by Muḥammad in the Traditions:—

“The liberal man is near to God, near to Paradise, near to men, and distant from hell. The miser is far from God, far from Paradise, far from man, and near the fire. Truly an ignorant but liberal man is more beloved by God, than a miser who is a worshipper of God.”

“Three people will not enter Paradise: a deceiver, a miser, and one who reproaches others with obligation after giving.”

“Every morning God sends two angels, and one of them says, ‘O God, give to the liberal man something in lieu of that which he has given away!’ and the other says, ‘O God, ruin the property of the miser!’ ”

“The miser and the liberal man are like two men dressed in coats of mail, their arms glued to their breasts and collar bones, on account of the tightness of the coats of mail. The liberal man stands up when giving alms, and the coat of mail expands for him. The miser stands up when intending alms; the coat of mail becomes tight, and every ring of it sticks fast to its place.”

LIḤYAH (لحية‎). [BEARD.]

LISĀNU ʾL-ḤAQQ (لسان الحق‎). Lit. “The language of truth.” The Insānu ʾl-Kāmil, or “perfect man,” in which the secret influences of al-Mutakallim, “the Speaker” (i.e. God), are evident.

LITERATURE, MUSLIM. Arabic ʿIlmu ʾl-Adab (علم الادب‎). The oldest specimens of Arabic literature now extant were composed in the century which preceded the birth of Muḥammad. They consist of short extemporaneous elegies, afterwards committed to writing, or narratives of combats of hostile tribes written in rhythmical prose, similar to that which we find in the Qurʾān.

Baron De Slane says the Ḥamāsah, the Kitābu ʾl-Ag͟hānī, and the Amālī of Abū ʿAlīyu ʾl-Kālī, furnish a copious supply of examples, which prove that the art of composing in rhythmical prose not only existed before Muḥammad’s time, but was even then generally practised, and had been brought to a high degree of perfection. The variety of its inflections, the regularity of its syntax, and the harmony of its prosody, furnish in themselves a proof of the high degree of culture which the language of the pre-Islamic Arabians had attained. The annual meetings of the poets at the fair of ʿUkāz̤ encouraged literature, and tended to give regularity of formation and elegance of style to these early poetic effusions.

The appearance of the Qurʾān brought about a gradual, but remarkable change in tone and spirit of Arabic literature. An extraordinary admixture of falsehood and truth, it was given to the world by its author as the uncreated and Eternal Word, and as a standing miracle not only of sound doctrine, but of literary style and language. This strange assertion, of course, deterred nearly every attempt at imitation, although it is related that Ibn al-Muqaffaʿ, al-Mutanabbi, and a few others, of a sceptical turn of mind, essayed in some of their writings to surpass the style of the Qurʾān. But as the Muslims in all ages have drawn their principles of grammar and rhetoric from the Qurʾān itself, we need not be surprised that these and every other attempt to surpass its excellences have been considered failures.

One circumstance in the earliest history of Islām was of itself instrumental in giving rise to a most extensive literature of a special class. The Qurʾān (unlike the Pentateuch and New Testament) was not a narrative of the life of its author. And yet, at the same time, Muḥammad had left very special injunctions as to the transmission of his precepts and actions. [TRADITION.] The study of these traditional sayings, together with that of the Qurʾān, gave rise to all the branches of Arabic learning.

The Aḥādīs̤, or “the sayings of Muḥammad,” were considered by his followers as the result of divine inspiration, and they were therefore treasured up in the memories of his followers with the same care which they had taken in learning by heart the chapters of the Qurʾān. They recorded not only what the Prophet said and did, but also what he refrained from saying and doing, his very silence (sunnatu ʾs-sukūt) on questions of doctrine or rule of life being also regarded as the result of divine guidance. It therefore became of paramount importance, to those who were sincere followers of Muḥammad, that they should be in possession of his precepts and practices, and even of the most trifling circumstances of his daily life. The mass of traditions increased rapidly, and became so great that it was quite impossible for any one single person to recollect them.

According to Jalālu ʾd-dīn as-Suyūt̤ī, the first who wrote down the traditional sayings of the Prophet was Ibn Shihāb az-Zuhrī, during the reign of the K͟halīfah ʿUmar II. ibn ʿAbdi ʾl-ʿAzīz (A.H. 99–101); but the Imām Mālik (A.H. 95–179), the compiler of the book known as al-Muwat̤t̤ā is generally held to be the author of the earliest collection of Traditions. (See Kashfu ʾz̤-Z̤unūn, in loco.)

So rapidly did this branch of Muslim learning increase, that when al-Buk͟hārī (A.H. 194–256) determined to make a careful collation of trustworthy traditions, he found not fewer than 300,000 extant, from which he selected 7,275.

The necessity of distinguishing the genuine traditions from the false gave rise to new branches of literature. A just appreciation of the credit to which each traditionist was entitled, could only be formed from a knowledge of the details of his history, and of the moral character of his life. Hence numerous biographical works, arranged in chronological order, containing short accounts of the principal persons connected with the early history of Islām, were compiled. The necessity for tracing the places of their birth and the race from which they sprang, led Muslim critics to the study of genealogy and geography.

The sense of the Qurʾān, with its casual references to contemporaneous as well as to past history, was felt to be difficult and obscure, in many places; and this led the learned Muslims to study not only the traditional sayings of Muḥammad already alluded to, but any historical or geographical works which would help them in understanding the text of “the Book.”

In the early days of Islām, general history was regarded with little favour as a subject for study, and many orthodox doctors of Muslim law were led by religious scruples to condemn the study of secular history; and the works of Grecian and Latin poets, philologists, grammarians, and historians, only received their approval in so far as they served to explain the text of the Qurʾān and the traditional records of Muḥammad’s followers.

The real attitude of the leaders of Islām was decidedly hostile towards all literature which was not in strict harmony with the teachings of their religion. If in succeeding ages the Saracens became, as they undoubtedly did, the liberal patrons of literature and science, there cannot be a doubt that in the earliest ages of Islām, in the days of the four “well-directed” K͟halīfahs, not merely the greatest indifference, but the most bigoted opposition was shown to all literary effort which had not emanated from the fountain of Islām itself. And consequently the wild uncivilized conquerors of Jerusalem, Cæsarea, Damascus, and Alexandria, viewed the destruction of the literary lore of ages which was stored up in those ancient cities with indifference, if not with unmitigated satisfaction. Everything, science, history, and religion, must be brought down to the level and standard of the teaching of the Qurʾān and the life of the Prophet of Arabia, and whatever differed therefrom was from the Devil himself, and deserved the pious condemnation of every true child of the faith.

But the possession of power and riches gave rise to new feelings, and the pious aversion to intellectual pursuits gradually relaxed in proportion as their empire extended itself. The possession of those countries, which had for so long been the seats of ancient literature and art, naturally introduced among the Muslims a spirit of refinement, and the love of learning. But it was not the outcome of their religious belief, it was the result of the peculiar circumstances which surrounded their unparalleled conquest of a civilized world. Their stern fanaticism yielded to the mild influence of letters, and, “by a singular anomaly,” says Andrew Crichton, “in the history of nations, Europe became indebted to the implacable enemies of her religion and her liberties for her most valuable lessons in science and arts.” In this they present a marked contrast to the Goths and Huns; and what is most remarkable is, not that successful conquerors should encourage literature, but that, within a single century, a race of religionists should pass from a period of the deepest barbarism to that of the universal diffusion of science. In A.D. 641, the K͟halīfah ʿUmar is said to have destroyed the Alexandrian library. In A.D. 750, the K͟halīfahs of Bag͟hdād, the munificent patrons of literature, mounted the throne. Eight centuries elapsed from the foundation of Rome to the age of Augustus, whilst one century alone marks the transition from the wild barbarism of the K͟halīfahs of Makkah to the intellectual refinement of the K͟halīfahs of al-Kūfah and Bag͟hdād. The Saracens, when they conquered the cities of the West, came into possession of the richest legacies of intellectual wealth, and they used these legacies in such a manner as to earn for themselves the most prominent place in the page of history as patrons of learning. But the truth is, the literature of the great Byzantine empire exercised a kind of patronage over Saracenic kings. If the Saracens produced not many original works on science, philosophy, or art, they had the energy and good sense to translate those of Greece and Rome. (See the list of Arabic works in the Kashfu ʾz̤-Z̤unūn.)

Under the Umaiyah K͟halīfahs, the genius of Greece began to obtain an influence over the minds of the Muslims.

ʿAbdu ʾl-Mālik, the fifth K͟halīfah of the Umaiyah dynasty (A.H. 65), was himself a poet, and assembled around him at his court the most distinguished poets of his time. Even the Christian poet, al-Ak͟ht̤al took his place in the front rank of the literary favorites of the Court.

But it was especially under al-Manṣūr, the Abbaside K͟halīfah (A.H. 136), that the golden age of Arabian literature in the East commenced. Accident brought him acquainted with a Greek physician named George, who was invited to court, and to whom the Saracens are indebted for the study of medicine.

The celebrated Hārūnu ʾr-Rashīd, the hero of the Arabian Nights, was specially the patron of learning. He was always surrounded by learned men, and whenever he erected a mosque he always established and endowed a school of learning in connection with it. It is related that amongst the presents he sent to the Emperor Charlemagne was an hydraulic clock. The head of his schools and the chief director of the education of his empire, was John ibn Massua, a Nestorian Christian of Damascus.

The reign of Maʾmūn (A.H. 198) has been called the Augustan period of Arabian literature. The K͟halīfah Maʾmūn himself was a scholar, and he selected for his companions the most eminent scholars from the East and West. Bag͟hdād became the resort of poets, philosophers, historians, and mathematicians from every country and every creed. Amongst the scholars of his court was al-Kindī, the Christian author of a remarkable treatise in defence of Christianity against Islām, side by side with al-Kindī, the philosopher, who translated numerous classical and philosophical works for his munificent and generous patron, and wrote a letter to refute the doctrine of the Trinity. [KINDI.] It is said that in the time of Maʾmūn, “literary relics of conquered provinces, which his generals amassed with infinite care, were brought to the foot of the throne as the most precious tribute he could demand. Hundreds of camels might be seen entering the gates of Bag͟hdād, laden with no other freight than volumes of Greek, Hebrew, and Persian literature.” Masters, instructors, translators, and commentators, formed the court of Bag͟hdād, which appeared rather to be a learned academy than the capital of a great nation of conquerors. When a treaty of peace was concluded with the Grecian Emperor Michael III., it was stipulated that a large and valuable collection of books should be sent to Bag͟hdād from the libraries of Constantinople, which were translated by the savans of his court into the Arabic tongue; and it is stated that the original manuscripts were destroyed, in order that the learning of the world might be retained in the “divine language of the Prophet!”

The K͟halīfah al-Wās̤iq (A.H. 227), whose residence had been removed by his predecessor, al-Muʿtaṣim, from Bag͟hdād to Saumara, was also a patron of letters. He especially patronised poetry and music.

Under al-Muʿtamid (A.H. 256), Bag͟hdād again became the seat of learning.

Al-Mustanṣir (A.H. 623), the last but one of the Abbaside K͟halīfahs, adorned Bag͟hdād by erecting a mosque and college, which bore his name, and which historians tell us had no equal in the Muslim world. Whilst the city of Bag͟hdād, in the time of the Abbaside dynasty, was the great centre of learning, al-Baṣrah and al-Kūfah almost equalled the capital itself in reputation, and in the number of celebrated authors and treatises which they produced. Damascus, Aleppo, Balk͟h, Ispahan, and Samarcand, also became renowned as seats of learning. It is said that a certain doctor of science was once obliged to decline an invitation to settle in the city of Samarcand, because the transport of his books would have required 400 camels!

Under the Fāt̤imide K͟halīfahs (A.D. 910 to 1160), Egypt became for the second time the asylum of literature. Alexandria had more than twenty schools of learning, and Cairo, which was founded by al-Muʿizz (A.D. 955), soon possessed a royal library of 100,000 manuscripts. A Dāru ʾl-Ḥikmah, or school of science, was founded by the K͟halīfah al-Ḥākim (A.D. 996), in the city of Cairo, with an annual revenue of 2,570 dīnārs. The institution combined all the advantages of a free school and a free library.

But it was in Spain (Arabic Andalus) that Arabian literature continued to flourish to a later period than in the schools of Cairo and Bag͟hdād. The cities of Cordova, Seville, and Granada, which were under Muslim rule for several centuries (Cordova, from A.D. 755 to 1236; Granada, to A.D. 1484), rivalled each other in the magnificence of their academies, colleges, and libraries. Muslim historians say that Cordova alone has produced not fewer than 170 eminent men, and its library, founded by al-Ḥakam II. (A.D. 961), contained 400,000 volumes; and the K͟halīfah himself was so eminent a scholar, that he had carefully examined each of these books himself, and with his own hand had written in each book the genealogies, births and deaths of their respective authors.

Muḥammad, the first K͟halīfah of Granada, was a patron of literature, and the celebrated academy of that city was long under the direction of Shamsu ʾd-dīn of Murcia, so famous among the Arabs for his skill in polite literature. Kasīrī has recorded the names of 120 authors whose talents conferred dignity and fame on the Muslim University of Granada.

So universal was the patronage of literature in Spain, that in the cities of the Andalusian kingdom, there were as many as seventy free libraries open to the public, as well as seventeen distinguished colleges of learning.

(For an interesting account of the state of literature in Spain under the Moors, the English reader can refer to Pascual de Gayango’s translation of al-Makkari’s History of the Muhammadan Dynasties in Spain, London, 1840.)

History, which was so neglected amongst the ancient Arabs, was cultivated with assiduity by the Muslim. There is extant an immense number of works in this department of literature. The compiler of the Bibliographical Dictionary, the Kashfu ʾz̤-Z̤unūn, gives a list of the names and titles of 1,300 works of history, comprising annals, chronicles, and memoirs. As might be expected, the earliest Muslim histories were compiled with the special object of giving to the world the history of the Prophet of Arabia and his immediate successors. The earliest historian of whom we have any extensive remains is Ibn Isḥāq, who died A.H. 151, or fifteen years after the overthrow of the Umaiyah dynasty. He was succeeded by Ibn Hishām, who died A.H. 213, and who made the labours of Ibn Isḥāq the basis of his history. Another celebrated Muslim historian is Ibn Saʿd, who is generally known as Kātibu ʾl-Wāqidī, or al-Wāqidī’s secretary, and is supposed to have even surpassed his master in historical accuracy.

Abū Jaʿfar ibn Jarīr at̤-T̤abarī flourished in the latter part of the third century of the Muslim era, and has been styled by Gibbon, “the Livy of the Arabians.” He flourished in the city of Bag͟hdād, where he died A.H. 310. At̤-T̤abarī compiled not only annals of Muḥammad’s life, but he wrote a history of the progress of Islām under the earlier K͟halīfahs. Abū ʾl-Faraj, a Christian physician of Malatia in Armenia, Abū ʾl-Fidāʾ, Prince of Hamah, and Ibn Kātib of Granada, are amongst the celebrated historians of later times. The writings of Ibn Ḥusain of Cordova are said to contain 160,000 pages!

Biographical works, and memoirs of men specially distinguished for their achievements, were innumerable. The most notable work of the kind is Ibn K͟hallikān’s Bibliographical Dictionary, which has been translated into English by De Slane (Paris, 1843). The Dictionary of the Sciences by Muḥammad Abū ʿAbdi ʾllāh of Granada is an elaborate work. The Bibliographical Dictionary, entitled the Kashfu ʾz̤-Z̤unūn (often quoted in the present work), is a laborious compilation, giving the names of several thousands of well-known books and authors in every department of literature. ʿAbdu ʾl-Munẓar of Valencia wrote a genealogical history of celebrated horses, and another celebrity wrote one of camels. The encyclopedias, gazetteers, and other similar compilations, are very numerous.

Arabic lexicons have been compiled in regular succession from the first appearance of the work supposed to have been compiled by K͟halīl ibn Aḥmad, entitled Kitābu ʾl-ʿAyn, which must have been written about A.H. 170, to the most recent publications which have issued from the presses of Lucknow, Bombay, and Cairo. [ARABIC LEXICONS.]

Poetry was, of old, a favourite occupation of the Arab people, and was, after the introduction of learning by the K͟halīfahs of Bag͟hdād, cultivated with enthusiasm. Al-Mutanabbī of al-Kūfah, K͟halīl ibn Aḥmad, and others, are poets of note in the time of the Abbaside K͟halīfahs. So great was the number of Arabic poets, that an abridgement, or dictionary, of the lives of the most celebrated of them, compiled by Abū ʾl-ʿAbbās, son of the K͟halīfah al-Muʿtaṣim, contains notices of 130. [POETRY.]

With Numismatics the Saracens of Spain were well acquainted, and Maqrīzī and Namarī wrote histories of Arabian money. The study of geography was not neglected. The library of Cairo had two massive globes, and the Sharīf Idrīsī of Cordova made a silver globe for Roger II., King of Sicily. Ibn Rashīd, a distinguished geographer, journeyed through Africa, Egypt, and Syria, in the interests of geographical science. But to reconcile some of the statements of Muḥammadan tradition with geographical discoveries must have required a strong effort of the imagination. [QAF.]

To the study of medicine the Arabs paid particular attention. Many of our modern pharmaceutical terms, such as camphor, jalap, and syrup, are of Arabian origin. The Christian physician, George, introduced the study of medicine at the court of K͟halīfah al-Manṣūr. [MEDICINE.]

The superstitious feeling of the Muslim as to the polluted touch of the dead, debarred the orthodox from attempting the study of anatomy. The doctrine that even at death the soul does not depart from the body, and the popular belief that both soul and body must appear entire to undergo the examination by Munkar and Nakīr in the grave, were sufficient reasons why the dissection of the dead body should not be attempted.

Operation for cataract in the eye was an Arabian practice, and the celebrated philosopher, Avicenna (Abū ʿAlī ibn Sīnāʾ) wrote in defence of depression instead of extraction, which he considered a dangerous experiment.

Botany, as subsidiary to medicine, was studied by the Saracens; and it is said the Arabian botanists discovered several herbal remedies, which were not known to the Greeks. Ibn al-Bait̤ār, a native of Malaga, who died at Damascus A.D. 1248, was the most distinguished Arabian botanist. Al-Birūnī, who died A.D. 941, resided in India for nearly forty years in order to study botany and chemistry.

The first great Arabic chemist was Jābir, a native of Ḥarrān in Mesopotamia. He lived in the eighth century, and only some 150 years after the flight of Muḥammad. He is credited with the discovery of sulphuric acid, nitric acid, and aqua regia. D’Herbelot states that he wrote 500 works on chemistry. The nomenclature of science demonstrates how much it owes to the Arabs—alcohol, alembic, alkali, and other similar terms, being derived from the Saracens.

The science of astronomy, insomuch as it was necessary for the study of the occult science of astrology, was cultivated with great zeal. The K͟halīfah Maʾmūn was himself devoted to this study. Under his patronage, the astronomers of Bag͟hdād and al-Kūfah accurately measured a degree of the great circle of the earth, and determined at 24,000 miles the entire circumference of the globe. (See Abū ʾl-Fidāʾ and Ibn K͟hallikān.) The obliquity of the ecliptic was calculated at about twenty-three degrees and a half, “but,” as Andrew Crichton remarks, “not a single step was made towards the discovery of the solar system beyond the hypothesis of Ptolemy.” Modern astronomy is indebted to the Saracens for the introduction of observatories. The celebrated astronomer and mathematician Jābir (A.D. 1196), erected one at Seville, which may still be seen. Bailly, in his Hist. de l’Astronomie, affirms that Kepler drew the ideas that led to his discovery of the elliptical orbits of planets from the Saracen, Nūru ʾd-dīn, whose treatise on the sphere is preserved in the Escurial library.

Algebra, though not the invention of the Arabs, received valuable accessions from their talents, and Ibn Mūsā and Jābir composed original works on spherical trigonometry. Al-Kindī translated Autolycus’ De Sphæra Mota, and wrote a treatise of his own De Sex Quantitatibus.

Architecture was an art in which the Saracens excelled, but their buildings were erected on the wrecks of cities, castles, and fortresses, which they had destroyed, and the Saracenic style is merely a copy of the Byzantine. [ARCHITECTURE.]

To the early Muslims, pictures and sculpture were considered impious and contrary to divine law, and it is to these strong religious feelings that we owe the introduction of that peculiar style of embellishment which is called the Arabesque, which rejects all representations of human and animal figures.

In calligraphy or ornamental writing, the Muslims excel even to the present day, although it is to the Chinese that they are indebted for the purity and elegance of their paper.

Music is generally understood to have been forbidden in the Muḥammadan religion, but both at Bag͟hdād and Cordova were established schools for the cultivation of this art. [MUSIC.]

Much more might be written on the subject of Muslim or Saracenic literature, but it would exceed the limits of our present work. Enough has been said to show that, notwithstanding their barbarous origin, they in due time became the patrons of literature and science. They cannot, however, claim a high rank as inventors and discoverers, for many of their best and most useful works were but translations from the Greek. Too much has been made of the debt which the Western world owes, or is supposed to owe, to its Saracen conquerors for their patronage of literature. It would have been strange if a race of conquerors, who came suddenly and rapidly into possession of some of the most cultivated and refined regions of the earth, had not kindled new lights at those ancient beacons of literature and science which smouldered beneath their feet.

In the Kashfu ʾz̤-Z̤unūn, it is related that when Saʿd ibn Abū Waqqāṣ conquered Persia, he wrote to the K͟halīfah ʿUmar and asked him what he should do with the philosophical works which they had found in the libraries of the cities of Persia, whether he should keep them or send them to Makkah; then ʿUmar replied, “Cast them into the rivers, for if in these books there is a guidance (of life), then we have a still better guidance in the book of God (the Qurʾān), and if, on the contrary, there is in them that which will lead us astray, then God protect us from them”; so, according to these instructions, Saʿd cast some into the rivers and some into the fire. So was lost to us the Philosophy of Persia! (Kashfu ʾz̤-Z̤unūn, p. 341.)

Such was the spirit in which the early Muslims regarded the literature of the countries they conquered, and which gave rise to the frequently repeated story that ʿUmar ordered the destruction of the libraries of Alexandria, Cæsarea, and Ispahan, while even the enlightened Maʾmūn is said to have committed to the flames the Greek and Latin originals of the books he caused to be translated. It therefore seems probable that the world of literature lost quite as much as it gained by the Saracen conquest of the West. What the attitude of the Muslim world now is towards science and literature, the condition of the Muslim in North Africa, in Turkey, in Afghanistan, and in India, will declare. A condition of things arising from peculiarities of religious belief. If we study carefully the peculiar structure of Islām as a religious system, and become acquainted with the actual state of things amongst Muḥammadan nations now existing, we shall feel compelled to admit that the patronage of literature by the Muslim K͟halīfahs of Cordova, Cairo, and Bag͟hdād, must have been the outcome of impulses derived from other sources than the example and precept of the Arabian legislator or the teachings of the Qurʾān.

(See Ibn K͟hallikān’s Biographical Dict.; Crichton’s Arabia; D’Herbelot’s Bibl. Orient.; Al-Makkari’s Muhammadan Dynasties in Spain; Pocock; Muir’s Mahomet; Abū ʾl-Fidāʾ; Toderini’s Lit. des Turcs; Kashfu ʾz̤-Z̤unūn; Sir William Jones’s Asiatic Res.; Schnurrer’s Bibl. Arab.; Ibn al-Jazwī’s Talqīḥ; M. de Sacey; T̤abaqātu ʾsh-Shāfiʿīyīn.)

LITURGY. [PRAYER.]

LIWĀʾ (لواء‎). A banner; a standard. [STANDARDS.]

LOCUSTS (Arabic jarād, جراد‎) are lawful food for Muslims without being killed by ẕabḥ. [FOOD.]

LOGIC. Arabic ʿIlmu ʾl-mant̤iq (علم المنطق‎), “the science of rational speech,” from nat̤aq, “to speak”; ʿIlmu ʾl-mīzān (علم الميزان‎), “the science of weighing” (evidence), from mīzān, “scales.”

The author of the Ak͟hlāq-i-Jalālī says “the ancient sages, whose wisdom had borrowed its lustre from the loop-hole of prophecy, always directed the seeker after excellence to cultivate first ʿIlmu ʾl-ak͟hlāq, ‘the science of moral culture,’ then ʿIlmu ʾl-mant̤iq, ‘the science of logic,’ then ʿIlmu ʾl-riyāẓīyāt, ‘mathematics,’ then ʿIlmu ʾl-ḥikmah, ‘physics,’ and, lastly, ʿIlmu ʾl-Ilāhī, ‘theology.’ But Ḥakīm Abū ʿAlī al-Mas̤qawī (A.D. 10), would place mathematics before logic, which seems the preferable course. This will explain the inscription placed by Plato over the door of his house, ‘He who knows not geometry, let him not enter here.’ ” (See Thompson’s ed. p. 31.)

The Arabs, being suddenly called from the desert of Arabia to all the duties and dignities of civilized life, were at first much pressed to reconcile the simplicity of the precepts of their Prophet with the surroundings of their new state of existence; and consequently the multitude of distinctions, both in morals and jurisprudence, they were obliged to adopt, gave the study of dialectics an importance in the religion of Islām which it never lost. The Imām Mālik said of the great teacher Abū Ḥanīfah, that he was such a master of logic, that if he were to assert that a pillar of wood was made of gold, he would prove it to you by the rules of logic.

The first Muslim of note who gave his attention to the study of logic was K͟hālid ibn Yazīd (A.H. 60), who is reported to have been a man of great learning, and who ordered certain Greek works on logic to be translated into Arabic. The K͟halīfah Maʾmūn (A.H. 198) gave great attention to this and to every other branch of learning, and ordered the translation of several Greek books of logic, brought from the library of Constantinople, into the Arabic tongue. Mulla Kātib Chalpi gives a long list of those who have translated works on logic. Stephen, named Istifānu ʾl-Qadīm, translated a book for K͟hālid ibn Yazīd. Batrīq did one for the K͟halīfah al-Manṣūr. Ibn Yaḥyā rendered a Persian book on logic into Arabic for the K͟halīfah al-Maʾmūn, also Ibn Naʿimah ʿAbdu ʾl-Masīḥ (a Christian), Ḥusain bin Bahrīq, Hilāl ibn Abī Hilāl of Ḥimṣ, and many others translated books on logic from the Persian. Mūsā and Yūsuf, two sons of K͟hālid, and Ḥasan ibn Sahl are mentioned as having translated from the language of Hind (India) into Arabic. Amongst the philosophers who rendered Greek books on logic into Arabic are mentioned Ḥunain, Abū ʾl-Faraj, Abū ʾl-Sulaiman as-Sanjari, Yaḥyā an-Naḥwī, Yaʿqūb ibn Isḥāq al-Kindī, Abū Zaid Aḥmad ibn Sahl al-Balk͟hī, Ibn Sīnāʾ (Avicenna), and very many others.

An Arabic treatise of logic has been translated into English by the Bengal Asiatic Society.

LORD’S SUPPER. [EUCHARIST.]

LOT. Arabic Lūt̤ (لوط‎). Heb. ‏לוֹט‎. Held by Muḥammadans as “a righteous man,” specially sent as a prophet to the city of Sodom.

The commentator, al-Baiẓāwī, says that Lot was the son of Hārān, the son of Āzar, or Tarāḥ, and consequently Abraham’s nephew, who brought him with him from Chaldea into Palestine, where, they say, he was sent by God, to reclaim the inhabitants of Sodom and the other neighbouring cities, which were overthrown with it, from the unnatural vice to which they were addicted. And this Muḥammadan tradition seems to be countenanced by the words of the apostle, that this righteous man dwelling among them, in seeing and hearing, “vexed his righteous soul from day to day with their unlawful deeds,” whence it is probable that he omitted no opportunity of endeavouring their reformation. His name frequently occurs in the Qurʾān, as will be seen from the following selections:—

Sūrah vii. 72–82: “We also sent Lot, when he said to his people, Commit ye this filthy deed in which no creature hath gone before you? Come ye to men, instead of women, lustfully? Ye are indeed a people given up to excess. But the only answer of his people was to say, ‘Turn them out of your city, for they are men who vaunt them pure.’ And we delivered him and his family, except his wife; she was of those who lingered: and we rained a rain upon them: and see what was the end of the wicked!”

Sūrah xxi. 74, 75: “And unto Lot we gave wisdom and knowledge; and we rescued him from the city which wrought filthiness; for they were a people, evil, perverse: and we caused him to enter into our mercy, for he was of the righteous.”

Sūrah xxix. 27–34: “We sent also Lot: when he said to his people, ‘Proceed ye to a filthiness in which no people in the world hath ever gone before you? Proceed ye even to men? attack ye them on the highway? and proceed ye to the crime in your assemblies?’ But the only answer of his people was to say, ‘Bring God’s chastisement upon us, if thou art a man of truth.’ He cried: My Lord! help me against this polluted people. And when our messengers came to Abraham with the tidings of a son, they said, ‘Of a truth we will destroy the in-dwellers in this city, for its in-dwellers are evil doers.’ He said, ‘Lot is therein.’ They said, ‘We know full well who therein is. Him and his family will we save, except his wife; she will be of those who linger.’ And when our messengers came to Lot, he was troubled for them, and his arm was too weak to protect them; and they said, ‘Fear not, and distress not thyself, for thee and thy family will we save, except thy wife; she will be of those who linger. We will surely bring down upon the dwellers in this city vengeance from heaven for the excesses they have committed.’ And in what we have left of it is a clear sign to men of understanding.”

Sūrah xxvi. 160–175: “The people of Lot treated their apostles as liars, when their brother Lot said to them, ‘Will ye not fear God? I am your Apostle worthy of all credit: fear God, then, and obey me. For this I ask you no reward: my reward is of the Lord of the worlds alone. What! with men, of all creatures, will ye have commerce? And leave ye your wives whom your Lord hath created for you? Ah! ye are an erring people!’ They said, ‘O Lot, if thou desist not, one of the banished shalt thou surely be.’ He said, ‘I utterly abhor your doings: My Lord! deliver me and my family from what they do.’ So we delivered him and his whole family—save an aged one among those who tarried—then we destroyed the rest—and we rained a rain upon them, and fatal was the rain to those whom we had warned. In this truly was a sign; but most of them did not believe. But thy Lord! He is the Powerful, the Merciful!”

Sūrah xxvii. 55–59: “And Lot, when he said to his people, ‘What! proceed ye to such filthiness with your eyes open? What! come ye with lust unto men rather than to women? Surely ye are an ignorant people.’ And the answer of his people was but to say, ‘Cast out the family of Lot from your city: they, forsooth, are men of purity!’ So we rescued him and his family: but as for his wife, we decreed her to be of them that lingered: and we rained a rain upon them, and fatal was the rain to those who had had their warning.”