text: The Cow Jerry/Chapter 7

title: The Cow Jerry/Chapter 7


text: The Cow Jerry/Chapter 8

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: The Cow Jerry/Chapter 8


text: The Cow Jerry/Chapter 9

title: The Cow Jerry/Chapter 9


text:
Page:The philosophy and theology of Averroes.djvu/36

 them and those are men who are "well grounded in knowledge" a divine injunction which cannot be overlooked. For if such people do not know the interpretation in these matters they will have no special criterion of truth for their faith, which the common people have not, while God has described them as believing in Him. This kind of faith is always produced by the acceptance of the arguments, and that is not possible without a knowledge of interpretation. Otherwise, even the common people believe in the words of God without any philosophy whatever. The faith which the Quran has especially ascribed to the learned must be a faith strengthened with full arguments, which cannot be without a knowledge of the canons of interpretation. For God has said that the Law admits of interpretation which is its real significance, and this is what is established by arguments. Yet though this is so, it is impossible to establish


text: The Cow Jerry/Chapter 10

title: The Cow Jerry/Chapter 10


text: The Cow Jerry/Chapter 11

title: The Cow Jerry/Chapter 11


text: The Cow Jerry/Chapter 12

title: The Cow Jerry/Chapter 12


text: The Cow Jerry/Chapter 13

title: The Cow Jerry/Chapter 13


text:
Page:The philosophy and theology of Averroes.djvu/37

 any well grounded consensus of opinion in the interpretations which God has ascribed to the learned men. That is quite evident to anyone with insight. But with this we see that Abu Hamid (Al Ghazzali) has made a mistake in ascribing to the Peripatetic Philosophers the opinion that God has no knowledge of particulars. They are only of opinion that the knowledge of God about particulars is quite different from ours. For our knowledge is the effect of the existence of a thing. Such knowledge is produced by the existence of a tiling, and changes with changes in the thing. On the other hand the knowledge of God is the cause of an existent thing. Thus one who compares these two kinds of knowledge ascribes the same characteristics to two quite different things—and that is extreme ignorance. When applied both to eternal and to transitory things the word knowledge is used only in a fashion, just as we use many other words for objects essentially different, For


text: The Cow Jerry/Chapter 14

title: The Cow Jerry/Chapter 14


text: The Cow Jerry/Chapter 15

title: The Cow Jerry/Chapter 15


text: The Cow Jerry/Chapter 16

title: The Cow Jerry/Chapter 16


text: The Cow Jerry/Chapter 17

title: The Cow Jerry/Chapter 17


text: The Cow Jerry/Chapter 18

title: The Cow Jerry/Chapter 18


text:
Page:The philosophy and theology of Averroes.djvu/38

 instance the word Jalal is applied both to great and small; and sarim to light and darkness. We have no definition which can embrace both these kinds of knowledge, as some of the Mutakallimun of our times have thought. We have treated this question separately, at the request of some of our friends.

How can it be supposed that the Peripatetic Philosophers say that God has no knowledge of particulars when they are of opinion that man is sometimes warned of the coming vicissitudes of the future through visions, and that he gets these admonitions in sleep, through a great and powerful Director, who directs everything? These philosophers are not only of opinion that God has no knowledge of details such as we have but they also believe that He is ignorant of universals. For all known universals with us are also the effect of the existence of a thing, while God's knowledge is quite other than this. From these arguments it is concluded that God's


text: The Cow Jerry/Chapter 19

title: The Cow Jerry/Chapter 19


text: The Cow Jerry/Chapter 20

title: The Cow Jerry/Chapter 20


text:
Page:The philosophy and theology of Averroes.djvu/39

 knowledge is far higher than that it should be called universal or particular. There is therefore no difference of opinion concerning the proposition, that is, whether they are called infidel or not.

As to the eternal or transitory nature of the world: I think that in this matter the difference of opinion between the Asharite Mutakallimuu and the Ancient Philosophers is for the most part a verbal difference, at least so far as the opinion of some of the Ancients is concerned. For they are agreed on the fact that there are three kinds of creation—the two extremes and a medial one. They again agree oil the nomenclature of the two extremes, but they disagree as to the medial one. As to the one extreme, it has come into existence from something other than itself, or from anything else—that is from a generative cause or matter—while time existed before it All those, things whose existence is perceived by the senses, as water, animals, vegetation, etc., are in-


text: The Cow Jerry/Chapter 21

title: The Cow Jerry/Chapter 21


text: The Cow Jerry/Chapter 22

title: The Cow Jerry/Chapter 22


text:
Page:The philosophy and theology of Averroes.djvu/40

 cluded in this. All Ancient and Asharite philosophers are agreed in denominating this creation Originated.

The other extreme is that which came into existence from nothing, not out of anything, and time did not precede? it. The two parties are agreed in calling this Eternal. This extreme can be reached by logic. This is God, the Creator, Inventor, and Preserver of all.

The medial kind of creation is that which has neither been made from nothing, "matter," nor has time preceded it, but it has been created by some generative cause. In this is included the whole world. Again they all agree on the existence of all the three categories of the universe. The Mutakallimun admit, or they ought to admit, that before the universe there was no time, for according to them time is contemporaneous with motion and body. They are also agreed with the Ancients that future time and creation have no end, but they differ as to past time and


text: The Cow Jerry/Chapter 23

title: The Cow Jerry/Chapter 23


text: The Cow Jerry/Chapter 24

title: The Cow Jerry/Chapter 24


text:
Page:Weird Tales v13n04.djvu/117

Rh surprize and amazement of those who held her, she changed suddenly in shape, and when she died, it was not the Damsel Susanne they held, but a twisted cat.

The duke was brave, but for all his bravery he fainted.

When he came to his senses, he found that a large fire had been built and the cat was searing amid the flames. There was nothing to do but to stumble back to the castle.

The Lady Arabella told her husband that she had sat by the side of her daughter holding a golden cross in her hands and praying. At a certain time the damsel had screamed, sat up in bed, and then dropped backward. The mother and the old nurse thought she was dead, but her regular breathing soon showed the return of life. The rest of the night they spent in the bed¬room, one on each side of their beloved daughter, holding her hands.

The morning dawned, a lovely rose.

The damsel, waking, called for food. When milk was brought to her she drank it eagerly but complained that it hurt her to swallow. Then she fell asleep.

In the daylight they saw a red cross on her forehead.

On her neck were the livid marks of fingertips.

ROM a very early period of my life the entire bent of my inclinations had been towards microscopic investigations. When I was not more than ten years old, a distant relative of our family, hoping to astonish my inexperience, constructed a simple microscope for me, by drilling in a disk of copper a small hole, in which a drop of pure water was sustained by capillary attraction. This very primitive apparatus, magnifying some fifty diameters, presented, it is true, only indistinct and imperfect forms, but still sufficiently wonderful to work up my imagination to a preternatural state of excitement.

Seeing me so interested in this rude instrument, my cousin explained to me all that he knew about the principles of the microscope, related to me a few of the wonders which had been accomplished through its agency,

title: Page:Weird Tales v13n04.djvu/117


text: The Cow Jerry/Chapter 25

title: The Cow Jerry/Chapter 25


text: The Cow Jerry/Chapter 26

title: The Cow Jerry/Chapter 26


text:
Page:The philosophy and theology of Averroes.djvu/41

 Its creation. The Mutakallimun are of opinion that it had a beginning.

This is the belief of Plato and his disciples, while Aristotle mid his followers are of opinion that it had no beginning, just as the future has no end. It is clear that the last mentioned kind of creation resembles both the originated and the eternal creation. So one who thinks that in the past creation there are more characteristics of the eternal than the originated takes it to be eternal and vice versa. But in reality it is neither truly originated nor eternal. For the originated creation is necessarily subject to destruction while the eternal is without a cause. There are some, for example, Plato and his followers, who have called it infinitely originated, for according to them time has no end. There is not, here so great a difference about the universe, for it to be made the basis of a charge of infidelity. In fact, they should not be so charged at all, for opinions which are worthy of


text:
Page:The philosophy and theology of Averroes.djvu/42

 this are far removed from ours, those quite contrary to them, as the Mutakallimun have thought them to be in this proposition, I mean that they take the Words originated and eternal to be contrary expressions, which our investigation has shown not to be the case.

The strange thing about all these opinions is that they are not in agreement with the literal sense of the Law. For if we look closely we shall find many verses which tell us of the creation of the universe—that is, of its originated nature. Creation and time are said to be without end. For according to the verse: "It is He who hath created the heavens and the earth in six days, but His Throne was above the waters before the creation thereof" it is clear that there was a universe before this one, and that is the throne and the water, and a time which existed before that water. Then again the verse "The day will come when the earth shall be changed


text:
Page:Treaty of Peace - Versailles (1919) Ottawa.djvu/86

RV 86 (SESSIONAL PAPER No. 41)

The Commission referred to in Article 233 shall be called "The Reparation Commission," and is hereinafter referred to as "the Commission."

Delegates to this Commission shall be nominated by the United States of America, Great Britain, France, Italy, Japan, Belgium and the Serb-Croat-Slovene State. Each of these Powers will appoint one Delegate and also one Assistant Delegate, who will take his place in case of illness or necessary absence, but at other times will only have the right to be present at proceedings without taking any part therein.

On no occasion shall the Delegates of more than five of the above Powers have the right to take part in the proceedings of the Commission and to record their votes. The Delegates of the United States, Great Britain, France and Italy shall have this right on all occasions. The Delegate of Belgium shall have this right on all occasions other than those referred to below. The Delegate of Japan shall have this right on occasions when questions relating to damage at sea, and questions arising under Article 260 of Part IX (Financial Clauses) in which Japanese interests are concerned, are under consideration. The Delegate of the Serb-Croat-Slovene State shall have this right when questions relating to Austria, Hungary or Bulgaria are under consideration.

Each Government represented on the Commission shall have the right to withdraw therefrom upon twelve months notice filed with the Commission and confirmed in the course of the sixth month after the date of the original notice.

Such of the other Allied and Associated Powers as may be interested shall have the right to appoint a Delegate to be present and act as Assessor only while their respective claims and interests are under examination or discussion, but without the right to vote.

In case of the death, resignation or recall of any Delegate, Assistant Delegate or Assessor, a successor to him shall be nominated as soon as possible.

The Commission will have its principal permanent Bureau in Paris and will hold its first meeting in Paris as soon as practicable after the coming into force of the present Treaty, and thereafter will meet in such place or places and at such time as it may deem convenient and as may be necessary for the most expeditious discharge of its duties.

At its first meeting the Commission shall elect, from among the Delegates referred to above, a Chairman and a Vice-Chairman, who shall hold office for one year and shall be eligible for re-election. If a vacancy in the Chairmanship or Vice-Chairmanship should occur during the annual period, the Commission shall proceed to a new election for the remainder of the said period.

The Commission is authorized to appoint all necessary officers, agents and employees who may be required for the execution of its functions, and to fix their


text:
Page:The philosophy and theology of Averroes.djvu/43

 into another earth and the heavens into other heavens" shows equally when taken literally that there will be a universe after this one. Again, the verse: "Then He set his mind to the creation of heaven and it was smoke" Quran xli, 10. shows that the heavens were created from something.

Whatever the Mutakallimun say about the universe is not based on a literal sense of the Law, but is an interpretation of it. For the Law does not tell us that God was even before mere non-existenee, and moreover, this is not found as an ordinance in it. How can we suppose that there could be any consensus of opinion about the interpretation of verses by the Mutakallimun? In fact, there is much in the sayings of some philosophers which supports what we have quoted from the Law, taken literally.

Those who differ concerning these obscure questions have either reached the truth and have been rewarded; or have


text:
Page:The philosophy and theology of Averroes.djvu/44

 fallen into error and have to be excused. For it is compulsory rather than voluntary to believe a thing to be true, the proof of which has already been established; that is, we cannot believe or disbelieve it as we like, as it depends upon our will to stand or not to do so. So, if one of the conditions of verification be freedom of choice, a learned man, and he alone, should be held excused, if he makes a mistake on account of some doubt. Hence the Prophet has said that if a magistrate judges rightly he receives two rewards, and if he makes a mistake he deserves only one. But what magistrate is greater than one who judges the universe, whether it is so or not. I These are the judges—the learned men—whom God has distinguished with the knowledge of interpretation.

It is this kind of mistake of insight which learned people are quite apt to make when they look into those obscure questions the investigation of which the Law has imposed upon them. But the


text:
Page:The philosophy and theology of Averroes.djvu/45

 mistake the common people make in these matters is sin pure and simple, whether in theoretical or in practical things. As a magistrate, ignorant of Tradition, when he makes mistakes in judgment, cannot be held excused, so likewise a judge of the universe when not having the qualities of a judge is also not excusable, but is either a sinner or an unbeliever. If it be a condition that a magistrate shall have capacity of arbitration concerning the lawful and the forbidden, that is, knowledge of the principles of Law and their application through analogy—how much more befitting it is for an arbitrator of the universe to be armed with fundamental knowledge of the mental sciences, and the way of deducing results from them.

Mistake in the interpretation of the Law is thus of two kinds—a mistake which can be excused in one fit to look into the thing in which it has been committed, just as an expert physician is excused if he commits an error in the


text:
Page:The philosophy and theology of Averroes.djvu/46

 application of bis science; or a magistrate when he misjudges, and a mistake which is inexcusable in one not fit to investigate a thing. But the error which cannot; be excused for anybody, and which, if it happens to show itself in relation to the very principles of the Law, is infidelity, and if in universals is an innovation, is that error which is committed in those things which have been settled by all arguments and so the knowledge of them is possible for everybody, for instance, the acknowledgement of the existence of God, of Prophecy, and of the happiness or the misery of the next world. This is so, because all these three principles are proved by those three methods, the justification of which a man cannot deny by any means, that is exhortative controversial and argumentative proofs. A denier of such things, which are the very root of the principle of the Law, is an unbeliever, a retrograde with his tongue and his heart, or through negligence, on account


text:
Page:The philosophy and theology of Averroes.djvu/47

 of his denying them in spite of proofs. For if he be a man believing in arguments, he can verify them through these or if he believes in controversy, he can verify through that; and if ho believes in religious admonitions lie can well justify them through these. And hence the Prophet has said: "I have been commanded to fight with men till "they say: 'There is no God but Allah' and believe in me" that is, by any of these three means of attaining the Faith.

But there are things which, on account of their obscurity, cannot be understood by inference. So, God has favoured such of his creatures as cannot understand logic, either on account of their nature, habit, or lack of mental training, by quoting examples and parables of such things and has urged them to testify as to their truth through them. For everyone has mental capacity enough to understand them by the help of dogmatic and r hortatory argument which are common to all men. This is why the Law has


text:
Page:Treaty of Peace - Versailles (1919) Ottawa.djvu/87

RV 87 (SESSIONAL PAPER No. 41) remuneration; to constitute committees, whose members need not necessarily be members of the Commission, and to take all executive steps necessary for the purpose of discharging its duties; and to delegate authority and discretion to officers, agents and committees.

All proceedings of the Commission shall be private, unless, on particular occasions, the Commission shall otherwise determine for special reasons.

The Commission shall be required, if the German Government so desire, to hear, within a period which it will fix from time to time, evidence and arguments on the part of Germany on any question connected with her capacity to pay.

The Commission shall consider the claims and give to the German Government a just opportunity to be heard, but not take any part whatever in the decisions of the Commission. The Commission shall afford a similar opportunity to the allies of Germany, when it shall consider that their interests are in question.

The Commission shall not be bound by any particular code or rules of law or by any particular rule of evidence or of procedure, but shall be guided by justice, equity and good faith. Its decisions must follow the same principles and rules in all cases where they are applicable. It will establish rules relating to methods of proof of claims. It may act on any trustworthy modes of computation.

The Commission shall have all the powers conferred upon it, and shall exercise all the functions asignedassigned [sic] to it, by the present Treaty.

The Commission shall in general have wide latitude as to its control and handling of the whole reparation problem as dealt with in this Part of the present Treaty and shall have authority to interpret its provisions. Subject to the provisions of the present Treaty, the Commission is constituted by the several Allied and Associated Governments referred to in paragraphs 2 and 3 above as the exclusive agency of the said Governments respectively for receiving, selling, holding, and distributing the reparation payments to be made by Germany under this Part of the present Treaty. The Commission must comply with the following conditions and provisions:

(a) Whatever part of the full amount of the proved claims is not paid in gold, or in ships, securities and commodities or otherwise, Germany shall be required, under such conditions as the Commission may determine, to cover by way of guarantee by an equivalent issue of bonds, obligations or otherwise, in order to constitute an acknowledgment of the said part of the debt.

(b) In periodically estimating Germany's capacity to pay, the Commission shall examine the German system of taxation, first, to the end that the sums for reparation which Germany is required to pay shall become a charge upon all her revenues prior to that for the service or discharge of any domestic loan, and secondly, so as to satisfy itself that, in general, the German scheme of taxation is fully as heavy proportionately as that of any of the Powers represented on the Commission.

(c) In order to facilitate and continue the immediate restoration of the economic life of the Allied and Associated countries, the Commission will as provided in Article


text:
Page:The philosophy and theology of Averroes.djvu/48

 been divided into two kinds: exoteric and esoteric. The exoteric part consists of those examples which have been coined to express certain meanings; while the esoteric is the meanings themselves, which are not manifested except to the learned in philosophy.

These are the very four or five kinds of methods of knowing reality mentioned by Abu Hamid (Al Ghazzali) in his book called Al Tafriqah bain al Islam wal Zindiqah. If it so happens as we have said that we can know of a thing by any of the above mentioned three methods, then we do not stand in need of any examples for understanding them. Such things should be taken literally and interpretation should find no place with regard to them. If these things form a part of the principles of the Law, one who puts an interpretation upon them is an infidel. For instance, if a man believes that there is no happiness or misery in the next world, and that the teaching is only an artifice to safe-


text:
Page:The philosophy and theology of Averroes.djvu/49

 guard the life and property of the people from one another and that there is no goal for men other than this life, then he is certainly an unbeliever.

When th1is has once been established it will become clear to you that interpretation is not lawful in the exoteric part of the Law. If the canon of interpretation be used in the principles of the Law, it is infidelity, and if used in general things it is an innovation. But there is also a certain exoteric law which requires an interpretation from learned men. It is not misbelief for them to take it exoterically, but it is so or is at least an innovation in religion if ignorant men try to interpret or explain it.

Among these is the verse of Equalisation and the Tradition of Descent. For the Prophet said of a Negro slave girl who told him that God was in heaven: "Emancipate her, for she is a believer.' For there are persons who cannot believe a thing except through their imagination, that is, it is difficult for them to


text:
Page:Treaty of Peace - Versailles (1919) Ottawa.djvu/88

RV 88 (SESSIONAL PAPER No. 41) 235 take from Germany by way of security for and acknowledgment of her debt a first instalment of gold bearer bonds free of all taxes and charges of every description established or to be established by the Government of the German Empire or of the German States, or by any authority subject to them; these bonds will be delivered on account and in three portions, the marks gold being payable in conformity with Article 262 of Part IX (Financial Clauses) of the present Treaty as follows:

(1) To be issued forthwith, 20,000,000,000 Marks gold bearer bonds, payable not later than May 1, 1921, without interest. There shall be specially applied towards the amortisation of these bonds the payments which Germany is pledged to make in conformity with Article 235, after deduction of the sums used for the reimbursement of expenses of the armies of occupation and for the payment of foodstuffs and raw materials. Such bonds as have not been redeemed by May 1, 1921, shall then be exchanged for new bonds of the same type as those provided for below (paragraph 12, c, (2)).

(2) To be issued forthwith, further 40,000,000,000 Marks gold bearer bonds, bearing interest at 2$1⁄2$ per cent per annum between 1921 and 1926, and thereafter at 5 per cent per annum with an additional 1 per cent for amortisation beginning in 1926 on the whole amount of the issue.

(3) To be delivered forthwith a covering undertaking in writing to issue when, but not until, the Commission is satisfied that Germany can meet such interest and sinking fund obligations, a further instalment of 40,000,000,000 Marks gold 5 per cent bearer bonds, the time and mode of payment of principal and interest to be determined by the Commission.

The dates for payment of interest, the manner of applying the amortisation fund, and all other questions relating to the issue, management and regulation of the bond issue shall be determined by the Commission from time to time.

Further issues by way of acknowledgment and security may be required as the Commission subsequently determines from time to time.

(d) In the event of bonds, obligations or other evidence of indebtedness issued by Germany by way of security for or acknowledgment of her reparation debt being disposed of outright, not by way of pledge, to persons other than the several Governments in whose favour Germany's original reparation indebtedness was created, an amount of such reparation indebtedness shall be deemed to be extinguished corresponding to the nominal value of the bonds, etc., so disposed of outright, and the obligation of Germany in respect of such bonds shall be confined to her liabilities to the holders of the bonds, as expressed upon their face.

(e) The damage for repairing, reconstructing and rebuilding property in the invaded and devastated districts, including reinstallation of furniture, machinery and other equipment, will be calculated according to the cost at the dates when the work is done.

(f) Decisions of the Commission relating to the total or partial cancellation of the capital or interest of any verified debt of Germany must be accompanied by a statement of its reasons.

As to voting, the Commission will observe the following rules:

When a decision of the Commission is taken, the votes of all the Delegates entitled to vote, or in the absence of any of them, of their Assistant Delegates, shall be recorded. Abstention from voting is to be treated as a vote against the proposal under discussion. Assessors have no vote.

On the following questions unanimity is necessary:

(a) Questions involving the sovereignty of any of the Allied and Associated Powers, or the cancellation of the whole or any part of the debt or obligations of Germany;


text:
Page:The philosophy and theology of Averroes.djvu/50

 believe a thing which they cannot imagine. Among these may be classed men who cannot understand a thing except with a reference to space, and hence believe in God as though physical, notwithstanding that these are the very persons who have dealt very harshly with those mentioned above. They ought to be told that things of this character are parabolical, and that we should pause and consider the saying of God: "Yet none knoweth the interpretation thereof except God". Although learned men agree that these are to be interpreted, they differ in the interpretation according to their knowledge of principles of philosophy. There is a third part of the Law which occupies an intermediate position, on account of some doubt about it. Some say that it should be taken exoterically, and that no interpretation should be allowed in it; while there are others who say that they have some esoteric meaning, and should not be taken exoterically by the learned.


text:
Page:The philosophy and theology of Averroes.djvu/51

 This is on account of the obscurity of their meaning. A learned man may be excused if he makes a mistake about them.

If the Law is divided into these three parts, it may be asked: to which of these does the description of the state of the Day of Judgment Belong? We would reply that it is quite clear, on the very face of the question, that it belongs to that part in which there is some difference of opinion. For one group of men, who class themselves among philosophers, say that these things should be taken literally. For, according to them, there is not a single argument which makes their literal sense absurd and unreasonable. This is the method of the Asharites. But another group of philosophers interpret them; but they differ very widely in the interpretation itself. Amongst these may be mentioned Abu Hamid (Al Ghazzali) and a large number of Sufis. There are some who would amalgamate the two interpreta-


text:
Page:The philosophy and theology of Averroes.djvu/52

 tions, as Abu Hamid has done in some of his books. These questions are among those in which, if the learned men err they are to be excused; otherwise, they are to be thanked and rewarded. For, if one acknowledges the reality of the Day of Judgment, and then begins to apply the principles of interpretation to the description, and not its reality, he does not in any way deny it. A denial of its reality is infidelity, for it is one of the fundamentals of the Law, and it can be easily verified by any of the three methods of argument common to all men. But one who is not learned should take it exoterically, an interpretation in his case is unbelief, for it leads to infidelity. We are thus of opinion that such people should accept the literal sense, for interpretation will certainly lead them to infidelity. A learned man who discloses the discussions of these things to the common people helps them towards unbelief and one who abets another in that direction is himself no


text:
Page:The philosophy and theology of Averroes.djvu/53

 better than an unbeliever. It is therefore unsuitable that these interpretations should be published in any other than learned books, for in this way they will reach none but the learned. But it is a mistake both in religion and philosophy if they are put in other books, with dogmatic and exhortative arguments, as Abu Hamid has done. Although the author's intention was good, the idea, thus to increase the number of learned men, he caused a good deal of mischief through it. For, on account of this method some people began to find fault with philosophy, and others to blame religion, and still others began to think of reconciling the two. It seems that this was the very aim which Abu Hamid had in view in writing these books. He has tried to awaken the nature of men, for he never attached himself to any particular way of thinking in his books. He was an Asharite with the Asharites, a Sufi with the Sufis and a philosopher with the philosophers, so much so that


text:
Page:The philosophy and theology of Averroes.djvu/54

 he was, as has been said: "I am a Yeminite when I meet a Yeminite; if I meet a Ma'adi I am one of Banu Adnan."

Hence, it is necessary for the doctors of Islam to prevent men, except the learned, from reading his books; as it is incumbent upon them to hinder them from reading controversial writings which should not be studied except by those fit to do so. As a rule the reading of these books is less harmful than those of the former. For the majority cannot understand philosophical books, only those endowed with superior natures. People are on the whole destitute of learning and are aimless in their reading which they do without a teacher. Nevertheless they succeed in leading others away from religion. It is an injustice to the best kind of men and the best kind of creation; for in their case justice consists in the knowledge of the best things by the best people, fit to know it. It should be remembered


text:
Page:The philosophy and theology of Averroes.djvu/55

 that the greater the thing is the higher will be the injustice done to it on account of ignorance. Hence God says: "Polytheism is a great injustice."

These things we have thought proper to mention here, that is, in a discussion of the relation between philosophy and religion and the canons of interpretation in Law. If these matters had not become commonly known among men, we would not have said anything about them and would not have entered in a plea on behalf of the interpreters. For these things are suitable only for mention in philosophical books.

You ought to be aware that the real purpose of the Law is to impart the knowledge of truth and of right action. The knowledge of truth consists in the cogniscance of God and the whole universe with its inner significance, especially that of religion, and the knowledge of happiness or misery of the next world. Right action consists in follow-


text:
Author:Moritz Philipp Georg Tiling

Works

 * History of the German element in Texas from 1820-1850 (1913)

title: Author:Moritz Philipp Georg Tiling


text:
Page:The philosophy and theology of Averroes.djvu/56

 ing those actions which are useful tor happiness and avoiding those which lead to misery. The knowledge of these actions has been called practical knowledge. This is divided into two kinds: external actions, the knowledge of which is called Fiqh, that is, Theology; and actions pertaining to feelings, such as gratitude, patience, and other points of character to which the Law has urged us or from which it has prohibited us. This is called the knowledge of continence and of the next world. Abu Hamid in his book The Revivification of the Sciences of Religion seems to be inclined to this kind, and as the people have always turned away from the former kind of knowledge and have turned themselves to the second which leads them easily to piety, the book attained its name. But we have wandered from our own purpose and will now return to it.

If the purpose of the Law is to impart the knowledge of truth and of right


text:
Page:Treaty of Peace - Versailles (1919) Ottawa.djvu/89

RV 89 (SESSIONAL PAPER No. 41) (b) Questions of determining the amount and conditions of bonds or other obligations to be issued by the German Government and of fixing the time and manner for selling, negotiating or distributing such bonds;

(c) Any postponement, total or partial, beyond the end of 1930, of the payment of instalments falling due between May 1, 1921, and the end of 1926 inclusive;

(d) Any postponement, total or partial, of any instalment falling due after 1926 for a period exceeding three years;

(e) Questions of applying in any particular case a method of measuring damages different from that which has been previously applied in a similar case;

(f) Questions of the interpretation of the provisions of this Part of the present Treaty.

All other questions shall be decided by the vote of a majority.

In case of any difference of opinion among the Delegates, which cannot be solved by reference to their Governments, upon the question whether a given case is one which requires a unanimous vote for its decision or not, such difference shall be referred to the immediate arbitration of some impartial person to be agreed upon by their Governments, whose award the Allied and Associated Governments agree to accept.

Decisions of the Commission, in accordance with the powers conferred upon it, shall forthwith become binding and may be put into immediate execution without further proceedings.

The Commission will issue to each of the interested Powers, in such form as the Commission shall fix:

(1) A certificate stating that it holds for the account of the said Power bonds of the issues mentioned above, the said certificate, on the demand of the Power concerned, being divisible in a number of parts not exceeding five;

(2) Prom time to time certificates stating the goods delivered by Germany on account of her reparation debt which it holds for the account of the said Power.

The said certificates shall be registered, and upon notice to the Commission, may be transferred by endorsement.

When bonds are issued for sale or negotiation, and when goods are delivered by the Commission, certificates to an equivalent value must be withdrawn.

Interest shall be debited to Germany as from May 1, 1921, in respect of her debt as determined by the Commission, after allowing for sums already covered by cash payments or their equivalent, or by bonds issued to the Commission, or under Article 243. The rate of interest shall be 5 per cent unless the Commission shall determine at some future time that circumstances justify a variation of this rate.

The Commission, in fixing on May 1, 1921, the total amount of the debt of Germany, may take account of interest due on sums arising out of the reparation of material damage as from November 11, 1918, up to May 1, 1921.

In case of default by Germany in the performance of any obligation under this Part of the present Treaty, the Commission will forthwith give notice of such default to each of the interested Powers and may make such recommendations as to the action to be taken in consequence of such default as it may think necessary.


text:
Page:The philosophy and theology of Averroes.djvu/57

 action, this cannot be attained except by one of the two methods: viz, by conception or verification such as Mutakallimun have maintained in their books. There are three methods of verification open to people: philosophy, dogmatics and exhortation. There are two methods of conception: either by the thing itself, or by its like. As all people cannot by their nature understand and accept philosophical and dogmatic arguments, together with the difficulty of learning the use of inferences and the long time it takes to learn them, and the purpose of the Law being to be quite common among men, it is necessary that it should contain all kinds of verifications and conceptions. Among the methods of verification th<ere arc some which are meant for the common people: that is, exhortative and dogmatic, the exhortative being more common than the other. There is one method which is meant solely for the learned, and that is the method of rational inference. Now, it is


text:
Page:The philosophy and theology of Averroes.djvu/58

 the primary aim of the Law to improve the condition of the many without neglecting the few, and hence the method of conception and verification adopted are common to the majority.

These methods are of four kinds: the first is that which, while in particulars the same in both, that is, both exhortatively and dialectically, is still true by conception and verification. These are syllogisms of which the minor and the major premise are certain, besides being easily imagined and well known. These are set before the deductions which an drawn from them, and not from their likes. To this kind of religious injunction there is no interpretation, and one who denies them or puts an interpretation upon them is an infidel. The second kind is that the premises of which although well known or easily imagined are also positively established. Their conclusions are drawn by analogy. Upon these, that is, their conclusions, an interpretation may be, put. The third


text:
Page:The philosophy and theology of Averroes.djvu/59

 kind is just the reverse of the second, that is, the conclusions are themselves intended and their premises are well known or easily imagined without being positively established. Upon these also—that is, upon the conclusions, no interpretation can be put, but the premises may sometimes be interpreted. The fourth kind is that the premises of which are well-known or conjectural without being positively established. Their deductions are by analogy when that is intended. It is the duty of the learned men to interpret them and of the common people to take them exoterically.

In short, all that should be interpreted can be grasped by philosophy alone. So the duty of the learned person is to interpret, and of the common people to take it literally, both in conception and in verification. The reason for the latter is that they cannot understand more. A student of law sometimes finds interpretations which have a preference over others, in a general way by verification:


text:
Page:The philosophy and theology of Averroes.djvu/60

 that is, the argument is more convincing with the interpretations than with the literal meanings. These interpretations are common and it is possible for them to be admitted by any whose speculative faculties have been developed in controversy. Some of the interpretations of the Asharites and the Mutazilites are of this type, though the arguments of the Mutazilites are generally the more weighty. But it is the duty of the common people who are not capable of understanding more than exhortation to take them exoterically. Indeed, it is not proper for them to know the interpretations at all.

Thus there are three groups into which men have been divided: Those who are not included amongst those who should know the interpretations. These are common people who are guided by exhortation alone. They form a vast majority: for there is not a single rational being who cannot accept a result by this method. The second are dogmatic


text:
Page:The philosophy and theology of Averroes.djvu/61

 interpreters. These are so, either by their nature only, or both by nature and habit. The third are those who can be definitely called interpreters. These are the philosophers, both by nature and by philosophical training. This kind of interpretation should not be discussed with the dogmatists, not to speak of the common people. If any of these interpretations are disclosed to those not fit to receive them—especially philosophical interpretations—these being far higher than common knowledge, they may be led to infidelity. For he wishes to nullify the exoteric meaning and to prove his interpretation. But if the exoteric meaning is shown to be false without the interpretation being established, he falls into infidelity, if this concerns the principles of the Law. So, the interpretations should not be disclosed to the common people, and ought not to be put into exhortative or doctrinal books-that is, books written with an expository purpose in view—as Abu Hamid has done.


text:
Page:The philosophy and theology of Averroes.djvu/62

 Hence, it is necessarrynecessary [sic] that the common people should be told that those things which are exoteric, and yet cannot be understood easily, the interpretations of which it is impossible for them to understand, are parabolical, and that no one knows the interpretation thereof except God, We should stop at the following words of God "None knoweth the interpretation thereof except God", This is also the answer to the question about some of those abstruse problems which the common people cannot understand: "They will ask thee concerning the spirit: answer: The spirit was created at the command of my Lord, but ye have no knowledge given to you, except a little." Again, one who interpretes these to persons not fit to receive them is an infidel, because he leads others to infidelity, which is quite in opposition to the purpose of the Law. This is especially the case when corrupt interpretations are put on the principles of the Law, as


text:
Page:A Complete System of Christian Theology (Wakefield, 1869, completesystemof0000wake).pdf/15

we enter upon the discussion of the various topics which more strictly belong to the Christian system, we will offer a few introductory remarks in regard to theology in general, and the sources from which it is derived.

In our remarks upon theology in general, we will notice its Nature, its Objects, and its Divisions.

The term theology is derived from, (theos,) , and , (logos,) a discourse; and literlaly signified a discourse concerning

The ancient Greeks used the term according to its most literal signification, and hence, those who wrote the history of the gods, their works and exploits, were called, or theologians. Pherecydes, of Scyros, was the first who was so denominated, and his work was entitled , or Theology. Homer and Hesiod were theologians in this sense of the word.

In the writings of the Fathers the term is sometimes employed in a restricted sense to denote some particular doctrine concerning God. Accordingly, they speak of the theology of the sacred Trinity, and of the theology of the Son of God; that is, the doctrine of the Trinity, and of the Divinity of Jesus Christ.

But in the twelfth century Peter Abelard employed the term to denote particularly learned or scientific instruction in religion; and this use of the word was preserved by most of the succeeding theologians. In the seventeenth century, however, many of the Protestant divines gave the name of theology to any knowledge respecting God and divine things, thus using the word in its etymological sense.


text:
Author:Jeanette Warmuth

As illustrator

 * Mistress Madcap Surrenders (1926) by Edith Bishop Sherman
 * I Know a Secret (1927) by Christopher Morley

title: Author:Jeanette Warmuth


text:
Author:Winfield Scott Morgan

Works

 * History of the Wheel and Alliance, and the Impending Revolution (1889)
 * The Red Light: A Story of Southern Politics and Election Methods (1904)

title: Author:Winfield Scott Morgan


text:
Page:The philosophy and theology of Averroes.djvu/63

 some men of our own times do. We have known many people who think they are philosophers and hence claim to find out strange things through philosophy, which are in every way contrary to religion, and they do not admit of any other interpretation. They think they must disclose these things to the common people. But by the disclosure of wrong notions they lead them to eternal destruction.

The difference between their aim and that of the jurists can be made clear by the following example. Since it is not possible to make every one an expert physician a certain physician laid down some principles for the preservation of health and the prevention of diseases, and he allowed the use of some things but prohibited others. Now a man comes and tells the people that the principles laid down by that physician are not correct and declares them to be false, and they become discredited in the eyes of the people; or says that they


text:
Page:The philosophy and theology of Averroes.djvu/64

 are capable of interpretations which they cannot understand and cannot verify by practice. Do you think that people in these circumstances will ever act upon those things which are useful for their health and for the prevention of diseases or that the man himself will ever be capable of acting on them? No, he will be quite incapable of doing so and thus will lead them all to destruction.

This is the case when those interpretations which they cannot understand are correct, to say nothing of those that are wrong. For they will not believe in health to be preserved, nor disease to be prevented, to say nothing of the things which preserve health or prevent disease. This is the condition of that man who discloses interpretations of the Law to the common people and those not fit to receive them. And hence he is an unbeliever.

The simile which we have described above is a real parallel, and not merely


text:
Page:The philosophy and theology of Averroes.djvu/65

 fanciful (as some may think) as it is correct in every respect. For the relation of the medicine to the body is the same as that of the Law to the soul. A physician is one who seeks to preserve the health when he finds it good and tries to restore it when it is missed. In the same way a religious law-giver is one who takes care of the health of souls, which is called piety. The Quran also makes clear its purpose, through religious action, by many verses. For instance: "O true believers, a fast is ordained unto you as it was ordained those before you, that ye may fear God" and "Their flesh is not accepted of God, neither their blood; but your piety is accepted by Him" and: "For prayer preserveth a man from filthy crimes and from that which is blameable." There are many other verses of the same nature in the Quran. Thus, we see, a religious law-giver seeks to establish this kind of health by religious know-


text:
Page:The philosophy and theology of Averroes.djvu/66

 ledge and practice. This is the health upon which depends happiness and in the case of its absence the misery of the next world.

This should have made it clear to you not merely that one should not speak of the wrong interpretation. But also that it is not proper to put even true ones in the books of the common people. These correct interpretations are of the faith which man has and of which the whole creation was afraid to bear the burden. By this we refer to the following verse of the QnranQuran [sic]: "We proposed the faith unto the heavens, and the earth, and the mountains, and they refused to undertake the same, and were afraid thereof, but man undertook it: verily he is unjust to himself and foolish." These interpretations and the idea that their discussion is necessary in the Law have given rise to many sects in Islam, so much so that they have denounced one another with infidelity and innova-


text:
Page:The philosophy and theology of Averroes.djvu/67

 tions. This is especially the effect of wrong interpretations. The Mutazilites interpreted a large number of verses and Traditions and disclosed them to the people. So also did the Asharites, though their interpretations were less in number. They only succeeded in creating hatred and wars among men, destroying the Law, and disuniting the people completely. To add to this, the method which they have adopted in proving these interpretations is adapted neither to the common people nor to the learned. For if you look closely into it, you will find that it is not correct according to the norms of logic—this anyone who has had any training may see for himself without the least effort. In fact, many of the principles upon which the Asharites build their conclusions are sophistical in their nature. They deny many fundamentals, like, the proof of accidence, the influence of one thing upon another, the necessity of cause and effects, abstract figures and the processes leading


text:
Page:The philosophy and theology of Averroes.djvu/68

 to them. Indeed, Asharite Mutakallimun have been in this respects unjust to Mohammadans, for one of their sects has denounced as infidels all those who do not recognise the existence of God by methods which they have devised for the knowledge of Him: but in truth they themselves are in the wrong and are unbelievers.

It is upon this point that the difference of opinion arises. Some say that the first principle is of reason, while others allege that it is of faith. That is to say they have thought that faith, even before knowing the methods common to all and to which the Law has made a call on all, is the only method of arriving at truth. Thus they have mistaken the real purpose of the Law-giver, and being themselves in the wrong they have led others astray.

If it be alleged that the method that the Asharites and other Mutakallimun have devised are not those general methods in the purpose of the Law-giver


text:
Page:The philosophy and theology of Averroes.djvu/69

 for the instruction of the common people, and that it is not possible without some method being adopted, then the question arises: What are those methods which are given in the Law We maintain that these methods are to be found in the Quran alone. For, if we look closely we shall find that in the Quran all the three kinds of methods are laid down, for the whole of mankind, both for the majority and for the learned few. If we reflect we shall come to see that no better methods can be discovered for the instruction of the common people than those mentioned in the Quran. Anyone who changes them by interpretations which are neither clear in themselves nor clearer than others to the common people, makes null and void their philosophy and their effect, the goal of which is the happiness of mankind. This is quite evident from the early and the later condition of Islam, for in the early days Muslims sought perfect excellence and piety by acting on those principles with-


text:
Page:The philosophy and theology of Averroes.djvu/70

 out putting any interpretation upon them. And those among them who knew any interpretation did not disclose it. In the later days interpretations were used, and piety decreased, the love for others was lost, and they became divided into schisms and parties.

Hence one who cares to remove this innovation from the Law, should turn to the Book, and should pick up from it the existing arguments for things whose belief is inculcated upon us. Further he should deeply think over the esoteric meanings, as far as possible, without putting interpretations upon them, except when they are not quite clear to nil. The assertions of the Book for the instructions of the people, when thought over are things, with whose help we can reach a stage from which none but the learned in logic can differ about the esoteric meaning of that which is not clear. This peculiarity cannot be found in any other assertions but that of the Book. There are three peculiari-


text:
Page:The philosophy and theology of Averroes.djvu/71

 ties in the assertions, which have been explained in the Quran, for the common people. First, that nothing can be found more convincing and true than these. Secondly, that they can be accepted by every nature; and they are such that none can know their interpretations, if there be any, except the learned in logic. Thirdly, that they possess a call to the righteous, for correct interpretations. This is neither to be found in the school of the Asharites nor in that of the Mutazalites i. e. their interpretations are neither generally acceptable, nor do they make any call to the righteous, nor are they right in themselves. It is for this reason that innovation has increased, and it is our desire to write about it, as far as it is possible for us, provide id that we get leisure for it, have power to do it, and God gives us a respite in life. It is just possible that this may be a beginning for the coming generation: because the breach of Law, due to evil passions, and changed beliefs is simply


text:
Page:The philosophy and theology of Averroes.djvu/72

 aggrieving and saddening. This is still enhanced by those, who ascribe themselves to philosophy, because an injury from a friend is worse than the injury from an enemy. Philosophy is a companion and a foster-sister to the Law, Hence an injury from this source is the worst kind of injury, even if we neglect the enmity, hatred, and animosity which is created between the two, although they are companions by nature and friends in reality. It has also been injured by many ignorant friends who ascribe themselves to it. These are the schisms which exist in Islam. May God set all aright, help all to His love, and bring together their hearts for piety, and erase enmity and hatred by his favour and grace.

Indeed God has removed much of evil, ignorance and the misleading ways through this strong government, and has led the many to good, especially the people who have walked in the path of scholasticism, and have a liking for the


text:
Page:The philosophy and theology of Averroes.djvu/73

 knowledge of the Truth. Because it has called the people to the knowledge of God by mediate paths, which are higher than the depressions of the blind followers: and lower than that of the high-sounding Mutakallimum; and has called the learned to their duty of considering fully the principles of Law.


text:
Page:The philosophy and theology of Averroes.djvu/75

 The question may be stated thus: If all this universe was in the knowledge of God before its creation, then, was it in His knowledge after its creation as it was before it "came into existence; or was it in His knowledge before its creation quite different from that after its coming into being? If we say that the knowledge of God about it after its creation is quite different from that which it was before its creation, it becomes necessary for us to admit that the eternal knowledge is changeable; or that when the universe came into existence out of non-existence, then there is an addition to the eternal knowledge; which is impossible. Again, if we say that the knowledge of it was the same in both the conditions, then it would be said: Was the created universe the same before its coming into existence as it was after its creation? To this objection it will have to be answered that it was not the same before its creation as it was after it, otherwise the existent and


text:
Page:The philosophy and theology of Averroes.djvu/76

 the non-existent thing would be the same. When the opponent has admitted this much, he may be asked whether the real knowledge does not consist in the cognizance of an existent thing as it is. If he says: "Yes," then accordingly it becomes necessary that when a thing changes in itself the knowledge of it must also change, otherwise it would be a knowledge of something other than the real object. Thus it would then be necessary to admit one of two things: either the eternal knowledge itself will change, or the created things would be unknown to God. And both of these alternatives are impossible with regard to God. This doubt is still further strengthened by the apparent condition of man, that is, the relation of his knowledge about non-existent things by the supposition of their existence and its relation when the thing in question is found. It is self-evident that both kinds of knowledge are different, otherwise God would have been ignorant of


text:
Page:The philosophy and theology of Averroes.djvu/77

 its existence at the time he found it. The argument which the Mutakallimun advance to meet this objection does not by any means deliver us from the doubt. They say that God knows the things before their coming into being, as they would be after they come into existence. If they say that no change occurs, they fall into mistake. If on the other hand they admit a change, they may be asked whether this change was known in the eternal knowledge or not. Thus the first doubt occurs again. On the whole it is difficult to imagine that the knowledge of a thing before and after its existence can be one and the same.

This is the statement of the doubt in the briefest terms possible, as we have put it for your sake. A solution of this doubt requires a very long discussion, but here we intend to state a point which might easily solve it. Abu Hamid (Al Ghazzali) has also tried to solve this doubt in his work: The Refutation of the Philosophers, but his method is by


text:
Page:The philosophy and theology of Averroes.djvu/78

 no means satisfactory. For he says something to this effect: he thinks the known and the knowledge are not connected with each other, so that when a change takes place in the one the other does not change in itself. So it is possible that it may happen in the case of Divine knowledge and the things existent, that is, they may change in themselves while God's knowledge may remain the same. For instance a pillar may he on the right hand of Zaid, it may be changed to his left without any change taking place in Zaid himself. But the illustration is not at all a correct one, for the relation has changed, that is, that which was on the right side is now on the left. That in which no change has taken place is the condition of that relation—Zaid. It being so, and the knowledge is only the relation itself, it is necessary that it should change with a change in the thing known, as the change in the relation of the pillar to Zaid, for it is now on the left after being on the right.


text:
Page:The philosophy and theology of Averroes.djvu/79

 The view which might solve this question is that it should be maintained that the condition of eternal knowledge of existent things is quite other than the created knowledge with regard to them. For the existence of a thing is the cause and means of our knowledge of it, while the eternal knowledge is itself the cause and means of the existent tiling. So if a change takes place in the eternal knowledge after the coming into being of an existent thing, as it does in the created knowledge then it is involved that the former cannot be the cause but only the effect of the existent things. Thus it is necessary that there should be no change in it, as there is in the created knowledge. This mistake always occurs by our taking eternal knowledge to be like the created one, by ail analogy from the seen to the unseen. The error in this analogy has already been exposed. Just as no change takes place in any agent after the creation of his act—that is, change of kind which was not


text:
Page:The philosophy and theology of Averroes.djvu/80

 found before—so no change in the eternal knowledge of God after the creation of the thing which was in His knowledge. So this doubt is removed. At the same time it is not necessary for us to say that as there is no change in eternal knowledge, therefore, He does not know an existent at the time of its creation, as it is. But we must believe that He knows not by a created but by His eternal knowledge. For a change in knowledge with a change of the existent thing is a condition of the knowledge which depends upon the existent thing, such a knowledge being created. Thus the relation of the eternal knowledge with the existent things is not the same as that of the created knowledge. It is not that there is no connection between them at all as some philosophers are said to maintain, who as the people think, say, at the time of doubt, that God has no knowledge of particulars at all. But this is not as is commonly supposed. They only say that He does not


text:
Page:The philosophy and theology of Averroes.djvu/81

 know particulars by any created knowledge, one of the conditions of which is its being created by them, by which it is an effect and not a cause. This is the last of the things about it which must be remembered. For our reason leads us to the fact that God is the Knower of things, all of them emanating from Him. This is so because He is a knower, not because of His existence, nor of His existence in any form, but only because of His being a Knower. God has said "Shall not He know all things who hath created them, since He is the sagacious, the knowing" The arguments also tell us that He knows by a knowledge which may be akin to created knowledge. So it is necessary that there should be some other knowledge for the existent things—and this is the eternal of God. Moreover, how is it possible to suppose that the Peripatetic Philosophers think that the eternal knowledge does not include particul-


text:
Page:The philosophy and theology of Averroes.djvu/82

 ars, while they say that these are a cause of admonition to us in our dreams, divine revelations, and other kinds of inspiration?

That is what we think about the solution of the problem—a solution in which there is no doubt or suspicion. God is the only helper to right judgment, and leader to truth. Peace be upon you, and blessings of God and His beatitude. God is the best knower of truth: and to Him is the return and the refuge.


text: The Philosophy and Theology of Averroes/Part 1


text: The Philosophy and Theology of Averroes/Part 1/Appendix 1a


text:
Page:The philosophy and theology of Averroes.djvu/239

 premise can only be true when we admit the existence of the prophets, and that the miracles are only performed by those who are the true claimants for prophetic mission. We would say that this premise is not true but for those who believe the existence of the prophets and the miracles. For instance if it has become clear to man, that the universe is created, then he certainly knows that the world exists and the Creator too. This being so, a man can object and say how can we say that one who performs the miracles is a prophet, when the prophetic mission itself remains unproved? Even after we admit the existence of miracle in the manner in which it may seem quite impossible, it is necessary that the two sides of the premise be admitted first and then the one can be applied to the other. One cannot say that the existence of the prophets can be proved by reason, because of its possibility. For the possibility to which they refer is in fact really ignorance,


text:
Page:The philosophy and theology of Averroes.djvu/240

 and is not found in the nature of things. For instance, if we say that it is possible that it will rain or not, then the possibility is found in the nature of things, that is, it is felt that a thing may sometimes be, and at others not be, as in the case of rain. Here, reason can exactly decide the possibility of a thing by its nature. The necessary (wajib) is quite contrary to it; that is, it is a thing the existence of which is always found. In this case reason can always decide without a mistake, because its nature cannot be changed or transformed. So when one party admits the existence of a prophet, at a certain time it appears that the prophetic mission is a thing whose existence is possible and the other party says that it cannot feel it, then that possibility becomes mere ignorance in its case. Now we believe in the existence of this possibility because we have known the prophets. We say that a knowledge of the messengers from man, leads us to a belief in the existence of


text:
Page:The philosophy and theology of Averroes.djvu/241

 messengers from God, as the existence of a messenger from Anir, leads us to the conclusion of there being a messenger from Zaid also. This requires a similarity in the natural dispositions of both men and it is here where the difficulty lies. If we suppose this possibility by itself even in the future, it will only be by the means of the known fact and not by our knowledge and reason. Now one of the premises of this possibility has come into existence. For the possibility is in our knowledge, and the fact in itself is an established one, by one of the two alternatives, that is, whether he sent a messenger or did not. So we have nothing in this case but sheer ignorance, as is the doubt whether Anir sent any messengers in the past or did not, which is quite different from our doubting, whether or not he will send any in future. So when we do not know about Zaid, for instance, whether he has or has not sent any messenger in the past, it is not correct for us to suppose


text:
Page:The philosophy and theology of Averroes.djvu/242

 anybody to be his messenger, if he happens to have his symbols upon him. We can admit his claim only after we know that Zaid did send a messenger. So when we admit the existence of the prophetic mission, and the miracles, then how can it be correct for us to say that one who performs the miracles is a prophet. We cannot believe in this by hearing only, for this faculty is not the thing by which such things can be proved. At the same time we cannot claim this premise to be true by experience and habit, except that the miracles performed by the prophets can be seen by one who believes in their mission, and has never seen them to have been performed by anybody else, so that they may be taken as a convincing sign for distinguishing a prophet of God, from one who is not, that is a distinction between one whose claim is right, and one whose claim is wrong.

By these things it is seen that the Mutakallimun have missed the whole


text:
Page:The philosophy and theology of Averroes.djvu/243

 purpose of the argument from miracles because they have put possibility in the place of real existence, possibility which is in reality ignorance. Then they have believed in the premise that every one who performs miracles is a prophet, which cannot be true except when the miracles prove the prophetic mission itself, and the sender of messengers. It is not by reason that we can believe in these marvelous things, which happen again and again, and are divine, as a conclusive proof of the existence of prophetic mission, except that one who can do such things is an excellent person, and that such persons cannot lie. But it can prove the prophetic mission of a person only when we admit that the mission does exist, and that such marvelous things cannot be performed by any person, however good he may be, except by one who is a aprophetprophet [sic]. The miracles cannot prove the prophetic mission of a person, because there is no connection between them and reason, except that we admit that the miracles are


text:
Page:The philosophy and theology of Averroes.djvu/133

 all to chance alone, and that they come into being by themselves.

Now then if this is the method adopted by the Law, it may be asked: What is the way of proving the unity of God by means of the Law; that is, the knowledge of the religious formula that "there is no god, but God." The negation contained in it is an addition to the affirmative, which the formula contains, while the affirmative has already been proved. What is the purpose of this negation? We would say that the method, adopted by the Law, of denying divinity to all but God is according to the ordinance of God in the Quran, contained in the following three verses. First, "If there were either in heaven or on earth gods beside God, verily both would be corrupted." Secondly, "God has not begotten issue; neither is there any other


text:
Page:The philosophy and theology of Averroes.djvu/142

 hod by which God has invited the people to believe in His existence, and negate the divinity of all but Him. These are the two propositions which are contained in the article of Faith, "There are no gods but He." So one who thinks over these two propositions, and believes in them by the method which we have pointed out, is a Muslim in reality, with a belief which is truly Islamic. But he whose belief is not based upon these arguments, though he confesses the article, he is a Muslim with the other Muslims, only on account of the similarity of names.

The attributes which the Divine Book has assigned to the Creator and Maker of the universe, are only the perfect forms of those which are found in man, and these are seven in number: Knowledge, life, power, volition, hearing, seeing and talking.

Now as to knowledge, God in his


text:
Page:The philosophy and theology of Averroes.djvu/159

We have already described the way which the Law pursues in teaching the common people the existence of God, the denial of His having any associates, and thereby the knowledge of His attributes, and the extent to which they have been explained in details in it, one after another. It is really an addition to, and deduction from, and change and interpretation of this very limit and extent which has not been productive of good to any and all the people. Now it remains for us to know the method which the Law has adopted in explaining to the common people the perfection of God and freedom from all defects, and the length to which it has gone in detailing it, and the cause of restricting its knowledge to them. Then we should mention the methods which it adopts in teaching the people the knowledge of His actions, and the latitude which it has allowed in this respect. Having


text: Page:กม ร ๗ - ๒๔๗๖.pdf/11

title: Page:กม ร ๗ - ๒๔๗๖.pdf/11


title: Index:Acommentaryexpo00pattgoog.djvu


text: Page:The life and letters of Sir John Henniker Heaton bt. (IA lifelettersofsi00port).pdf/19


text:
Page:Acommentaryexpo00pattgoog.djvu/1

A

ON

title: Page:Acommentaryexpo00pattgoog.djvu/1


title: Page:Acommentaryexpo00pattgoog.djvu/2


text:
Page:George Washington's October 3, 1789, Thanksgiving Day Proclamation. - NARA - 299956.jpg

 By The President of the United States of America. a Proclamation.

Whereas it is the duty of all Nations to acknowledge the providence of Almighty God, to obey his will, to be grateful for his benefits, and humbly to implore his protection and favor,and whereas both Houes of Congres have by their joint committee requeted me "to recommend to the People of the United States a day of public thanksgiving and prayer to be offered by acknowledging with grateful hearts the many signal favors of Almighty God, epecially by affording them an opportunity peaceably to etablih a form of government for their afety and happines."

Now therefore I do recommend and asign Thursday the 26$th$ day of November next to be devoted by the People of thee States to the ervice of that great and glorious Being, who is the beneficent Author of all the good that was, that is, or that will bethat we may then all unite in rendering unto him our incere and humble thanksfor his kind care and protection of the People of this country previous to their becoming a Nationfor the signal and manifold mercies, and the favorable interpoitions of his providence, which we experienced in the coure and concluion of the late warfor the great degree of tranquility, union, and plenty, which we have ince enjoyedfor the peaceable and rational manner in which we have been enabled to etablish contitutions of government for our afety and happines, and particularly the national One now lately intitutedfor the civil and religious liberty with which we are bleed, and the means we have of acquiring and diffusing ueful knowledge; and in general for all the great and various favors which he hath been pleaed to confer upon us.

and alo that we may then unite in mot humbly offering our prayers and upplications to the great Lord and Ruler of Nations and beeech him to pardon our national and other Trangresionsto enable us all, whether in in public or private tations, to perform our everal and relative duties properly and punctuallyto render our national government a blesing to all the People, by contantly being a government of wie, jut, and contitutional laws, dicreetly and faithfully executed and obeyedto protect and guide all Sovereigns and Nations (epecially uch as have hown kindnes unto us) and to bles them with good government, peace, and concordto promote the knowledge and practice of true religion and virtue, and the encreae of cience among them and usand generally to grant unto all mankind uch a degree of temporal properity as he alone knows to be best.

Given under my hand at the City of New York the third day of October in the year of our Lord 1789.


text:
Page:Acommentaryexpo00pattgoog.djvu/3

A

EXPOSITORY AND PRACTICAL,

ON

BY

LONDON: HAMILTON, ADAMS, & CO.; DUBLIN: JOHN ROBERTSON, AND HODGES & SMITH. MDCCCLVI.

title: Page:Acommentaryexpo00pattgoog.djvu/3


text: Page:กม ร ๗ - ๒๔๗๖.pdf/12

title: Page:กม ร ๗ - ๒๔๗๖.pdf/12


text:
Page:Oscar Ameringer - Socialism for the Farmer (1912).djvu/9

Once upon a time there was a great island named Slamerica. It laid two hundred miles beyond Christmas and on the left side of New Year. Its inhabitants called themselves Slamericans. The island was divided by a wide and turbulent river. On one side of the river lived the Slamericans who raised food; on the other side those who made Clothing. The river was spanned by a bridge belonging to a fat man named Ploot.

Now it so happened that the Slamerican food raisers could not live without clothing, while the clothing makers could not live without food. This being the case, one would think that these people simply exchanged the products of their labor, clothes for food, and food for clothes, but they didn't.

Whenever a food raiser wanted clothing to cover his nakedness he would fetch a pig to the owner of the bridge and Speak thusly: "Oh! mighty Ploot, Lord of Spondulix and Captain of Iron Wheels, behold thy servant and take pity upon him. The seat of my breeches has gone to naught and the seam of my garment has frazzled to frazzles, My elbows peep through the sleeves and cry for coverning. Mighty Lord, I pray of thee give me spondulix for this porker that I may purchase garments for my nakedness."

Thereupon Ploot would consult a chart of information. Which he had made for himself this very morning, and spake also: "The market price of pigs is five plunks to-day; here are the plunks."

Then the food raiser would tear his hair and smite his chest and cry in loud tones: "I am robbed, hornswaggled and flimflammed out of this noble porker which I have slopped, fed and nursed with more diligence and care than I have expended upon the children of my own bosom. Five plunks! oh! my eyes! Five plunks—have mercy upon me!"

But Ploot only smole a smile and jingled the silver plunks in his fat paw.

While the food raiser thus wailed and wept a chilly breeze stole out of the icebergs on the north pole and crawled through the holes of his garments and he made a frantic grab for the five plunks. "Now," he muttered, "let me have a garment."


text:
Page:NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE SURVEY 18; CZECHOSLOVAKIA; TRANSPORTATION AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS CIA-RDP01-00707R000200110013-9.pdf/16

 APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2009/06/16: CIA-RDP01-00707R000200110013-9

10

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2009/06/16: CIA-RDP01-00707R000200110013-9


text:
Page:CTRL0000034605 - Transcribed Interview of Angela McCallum, (December 8, 2021).pdf/87

87 different documents that I presented,

When you said you would have these meetings and then go back—I think it was, you said you, Madison, Chelsea, and Kerrick would go back and make the phone calls—was this over the course of a day, a number of hours, or weeks that you would call these elected officials with the script?

I believe that for all the calls that were made across various States it was a less-than-a-week time span. Like, more along the lines of all calls were made within a couple of days. I mean, these were all made, like I stated earlier, at the very end of November, first couple of days in December.

And, like I stated, when I left Philadelphia, you know, I basically went straight to Georgia, with the exception of stopping in South Carolina fora couple days. Sol would have, you know, moved on to the Georgia Senate runoff at that point. So, very short time period for these.

Do you recall if, when you were—I'll ask you this: Were you getting assignments from Mr. Brown about which States to call elected officials from?

Yes. Assignments on which States to call when, and then also assignments on which one of the four of us—and I believe that Michael was also making these calls, but I don't have any confirmation on that. So maybe let's say the five of us.

Sorry. I forgot the question mid-answer.

No, not a problem. So I want to confirm, Mr. Brown gave you and your four colleagues—Madison, Chelsea, and Kerrick—assignments as to which States to call elected officials from. Is that correct?

Yes, which States and, further, you know, which representatives or which senators in that particular State were also assigned to us.

Okay. So Mr. Brown also told you the specific elected officials to call for


text:
Page:CTRL0000034605 - Transcribed Interview of Angela McCallum, (December 8, 2021).pdf/88

88 the different States, to the best of your recollection.

To the best of my recollection. I think that it was also just basically, like, a situation where, you know, I have five, so Madison has five, so Kerrick has five, so Chelsea has five. You know, it was also a just fairness of splitting up people's time as well, you know, so we were all, you know, making five calls or whatever it was.

And do you recall that you all were—all the four of you, or potentially five if Mr. Brown was making calls as well, were calling elected officials in more than one State, not just Georgia?

Never more than one State at a time, I don't believe. So we would all be calling into the same State at one given time.

Do you—and I recognize it's been some time—do you recall the order of States that you called elected officials from?

No. And I really—I can't even speculate on it. I have no idea, the order. I do—actually, I do take that back. I know that Michigan took place sometime before Georgia. But as far as other order goes, no idea.

Do you recall if the phone calls were—well, I'll direct you to the document. It mentions on tab 7, if you look at the paragraph starting, "Right now, Mayor Giuliani is presenting experts and witnesses from Georgia to the Senate judiciary committee who will show the vote totals are fatally flawed and do not accurately represent the will of the voters"—so you can see here there's a reference to Mayor Giuliani presenting experts and witnesses. Do you see that?

I see it, yes.

Do you recall whether these calls to the State officials were coordinated with when Mr. Giuliani was presenting experts and witnesses in the State?

Based on the script, I mean, I can only assume that the timing of those—you


text:
Page:CTRL0000034605 - Transcribed Interview of Angela McCallum, (December 8, 2021).pdf/89

89 know, me making the calls and the timing of the presentation match up.

Did you have any involvement in Mayor Giuliani's presentation of experts and witnesses in any States in connection with the 2020 election?

None that I can recall.

I want to go back to something I said earlier about printing. I said that there was a time where I was printing those affidavits and declarations. I don't know what—sorry, I got distracted,

That's okay.

I don't know what exactly that printing was used for. I believe it was some kind of hearing or something like that. So, potentially, a presentation of witnesses could have to do with me printing those documents. But, like I said, I was not the one collecting those affidavits or anything like that. So, directly, no, I don't have anything to do with the presentation.

Do you recall ever being introduced to individuals who were described to be experts and witnesses associated with Mr. Giuliani in any of the States?

No. No introduction to experts or witnesses or any introduction to Mayor Giuliani.

In connection with when you received this script, were you provided any further information regarding the substance of what was being—of the claims made in the script?

Can you repeat the question?

Sure, and I can rephrase it.

Thank you.

When you received the script, did you receive any further information about—about the claims being made in the script?


text:
Page:CTRL0000034605 - Transcribed Interview of Angela McCallum, (December 8, 2021).pdf/90

90 Any further information about the claims in the script?

So I'll say this: To the extent someone would ask a question about something that you were asking in the script, were you provided any information so you could follow up and potentially answer their question?

No. Mostly, what I did with these calls is leave voicemails. No one was really answering the phone.

And if I did get a hold of someone and they had a question like that, I would make note of that, note their question or request or whatever it was on a spreadsheet. And I don't know if those notes were ever read or if anyone ever followed up with them.

Do you recall anyone asking questions about anything that you said after reciting your script?

No, I don't recall any particular questions that anyone had.

So you don't recall anyone asking any questions about, for example, that when you're calling a State official, elected official, that they have the power to reclaim their authority to send a slate of electors? Do you recall anyone asking questions about that statement?

No, I don't remember any conversations with State representatives or senators about that, about the power to reclaim.

Did you ever ask Mr. Brown or anyone else about the script, any questions about the script?

No. And I want to repeat myself from earlier: You know, as a low-level campaign staffer who really just looked at this as another job assignment, I didn't really give it much thought.

That's all I have to say.

If you go towards kind of the middle of the script, it says, "This is a clear path


text: Page:กม ร ๗ - ๒๔๗๖.pdf/13

title: Page:กม ร ๗ - ๒๔๗๖.pdf/13


text: Page:กม ร ๗ - ๒๔๗๖.pdf/17

title: Page:กม ร ๗ - ๒๔๗๖.pdf/17


text:
Page:Oscar Ameringer - Socialism for the Farmer (1912).djvu/10

 "Go easy," replied Ploot, "I am not in business for the fun of it. This bridge cost oodles of spondulix. Am I not entitled to a reward for my abstinence for not having eaten this bridge? Besides the land on which these pillars rest belongs to me and surely I ought to have some rent for the use of it. Then too I must have a little profit on my investment in this clothing stock. Therefore go hence and fetch me three more pigs.

"One for interest,

"One for rent, and,

"One for profit."

The food raiser departed with a sorely puzzled mind to do as he was told.

From the other side of the river approached a garment maker with a new suit of clothes slung over his arm. As soon as he spied the fat man on the bridge he cried, "My stomach is as empty as a summer resort in January. It growls until the echoes reverberate on the walls. Have mercy upon me and give me a porker to still the voice in my innards. O! mighty Ploot, take this garment and give me food."

Thereupon the Ploot handed to the garment maker five plunks and bade him to return and fetch three more garments. The poor worker looked flabbergasted at this, but Ploot only said:

"One for interest,

"One for rent, and

"One for profit."

The garment man was too hungry to argue the case, so he took himself hence to do as he was told.

When the food raiser and garment worker returned next day, the one with three pigs and the other with three suits of clothes, Ploot gave each one fifteen shining plunks. Then he sold the pig to the hungry tailor for twenty plunks and the suit of clothing to the shivering food raiser for the same sum.

These were prosperous times and business was brisk. The two workers had earned twenty plunks apiece. One departed with a pig, and the other with a new suit. Both were happy and so was Ploot, for he had not only gotten all his money back but three suits of clothes and three pigs in the bargain.

All the Slamericans went through the same transaction every time they needed food and clothing and so it happened that Ploot often got more than he could eat or wear. At such times he would lock the gates to the bridge and hang out a sign saying, "Closed on account of over production." But the


text:
Page:A Jewish Interpretation of the Book of Genesis (Morgenstern, 1919, jewishinterpreta00morg).pdf/19

Judaism is essentially a religion of this life and this world. Other religions may stress the though that this world is merely the preparation for the world to come, that there lies the goal of all existence, and that we must live in this life to the end and in such manner that we may attain to the life hereafter. But Judaism holds no such view. True, it affirms the doctrine of future life and of reward and punishment. But it is never magnified the other world at the expense of this. On the contrary, it teaches that this life is worth living for its own sake, that this world and all that it contains are good, that they were created by God for some purpose of good, and that man was put here by God to help realize by his own living this ultimate purpose of good. Judaism has, therefore, concerned itself chiefly with the tasks, duties and ideals of this life, assured that if this life be but well lived, the future, however it may be, will care for itself. Not salvation in the future world was its chief aim and concern, but faithful, conscientious performance of the daily, and often burdensome duties of this world. It has always cherished faith highly; but it was ever a true faith, which expressed itself in the lifelong conviction of the existence of one God, to know whom and to walk in whose way, daily and hourly, is man's supreme duty. Faith, in Judaism, could, and can, live and grow only with an ever-


text:
Kathleen

 * "Kathleen", a poem by John Greenleaf Whittier
 * Kathleen (1920), a novel by Christopher Morley

title: Kathleen


text:
Page:Oscar Ameringer - Socialism for the Farmer (1912).djvu/11

 great and wise ones among the Slamericans. called it a panic and explained to the people that over production of food was the prime cause of starvation, while too much clothing was the cause of the nakedness in the world.

One day a crank came among these people and said, "Let us build a bridge of our own and do away with Ploot who charges us interest for money he took away from us, who makes us pay rent for land which the Creator made for all, and who demands of us profit for being in our way. With a bridge of our own we can exchange pig for garment and garment for pig instead of paying four pigs for one garment and four garments for one pig." When Ploot heard this he called the Slamericans together and spake: "Harken unto me. This man would drive capital out of the country. Do I not give you work? By allowing you to make four suits for one pig and to raise four pigs for one suit, do I not give employment to you, your wife and children? If, as this agitator saith, a pig could be swapped for a suit and a suit for a pig, then you would be out of work three-fourths of the time. Does not the holy book Say, "in the sweat of thy brow thou shalt eat bread?" Who gives you an opportunity to sweat? It's me. This man would rob you of the incentive to work. He would destroy the Gods and steal your wives. Stone him, hang him!"

And when the people heard Ploot say all this they tied a millstone around the neck of the crank and sunk him to the bottom of the river.

Brother farmer, do you recognize yourself in this picture? Maybe not, but the capitalist system works, and works you, exactly like it. Only it's more complicated. But have you ever noticed that when you haul wheat, corn or cotton to town you never say to the buyer, "I want so much." You always say, "How much will you pay?" And when you buy goods in the store, you don’t say, "I give so much," but you inquire, "How much does it cost?" You do not set the price of the things you sell, or the price of the things you buy. And since the people to whom you sell and from whom you buy are in the business for profit they pay you as little as they can and charge you as much as you can stand.

Did you ever take a drove of hogs to town and then eat store cheese and crackers for dinner because you did not feel that you could afford a pork chop in the "short order" restaurant?

Did you ever escort a carload of export steers to Chicago and then eat oxtail soup and beef tongue in the cheapest hash


text: Page:กม ร ๗ - ๒๔๗๖.pdf/16

title: Page:กม ร ๗ - ๒๔๗๖.pdf/16


text:
Page:A Jewish Interpretation of the Book of Genesis (Morgenstern, 1919, jewishinterpreta00morg).pdf/16

viii his suggestive and stimulating counsel has immeasurably enhanced whatever value the book may possess.

It is my sincere wish and earnest prayer that this book may not only instruct, but may even inspire somewhat those who read it with deep and reverent love and loyalty for the religion of our fathers, which has descended to us through many centuries as our most precious heritage, and which we, in turn would cherish and safeguard and hand down enlarged and enriched unto our children and our children's children.

.

Cincinnati, Nov. 29, 1918.


text: Page:A Jewish Interpretation of the Book of Genesis (Morgenstern, 1919, jewishinterpreta00morg).pdf/5


text: Page:A Jewish Interpretation of the Book of Genesis (Morgenstern, 1919, jewishinterpreta00morg).pdf/4


text: Page:A Jewish Interpretation of the Book of Genesis (Morgenstern, 1919, jewishinterpreta00morg).pdf/3


text: Page:A Jewish Interpretation of the Book of Genesis (Morgenstern, 1919, jewishinterpreta00morg).pdf/2


text: Page:A Jewish Interpretation of the Book of Genesis (Morgenstern, 1919, jewishinterpreta00morg).pdf/1


text:
Page:Oscar Ameringer - Socialism for the Farmer (1912).djvu/12

 joint in Packingtown just to make both ends "meat?"

Did you ever haul a ton of sugar beets to the refinery and your wife hauled the sugar she bought with the six dollars you received for the ton of 15 per cent beets home under the buggy seat?

Did you ever sell a barrel of apples for one dollar and then throw a double decked fit when the "news butch" on the "Cannon Ball" soaks you a nickel apiece?

Did you ever sell a heifer, horn, hoof, hide and tallow and all and then buy back the tanned hide for more money than you got fer the whole beast?

Most likely you did and blamed it on the tariff, or the gold standard or those pesky "Labor union fellers" in town who do nothing but strike for more wages and who make the price of every blamed thing go clear out of sight.

But you're wrong. It's not the tariff or the gold standard or the Labor Unions that cause the trouble. It's the capitalist system. It's the man on the bridge between you and the city laborer.

That fellow pays you for a basket of grapes two cents, while the worker in town is soaked 40 cents for the same. That's an increase of 2000 per cent. Now you understand why that City worker howls for more wages.

The buyers pay 35 cents for potatoes in Waupacca, Wis., and the people of Milwaukee, only a hundred miles away, pay $1.50. This is an increase of 300 per cent of which only about 30 per cent went to freight and handling.

The farmer feeds the calf until it has grown into a cow. Then he feeds the cow, milks the cow, hauls the milk to the station and pays the freight to the city. For all this he gets four cents a quart. While the milk company for delivering the milk from the depot to the consumer gets an equal amount.

Asparagus; price paid to the farmer 8c; cost in the city 35c; an increase of 400 per cent.

Tomatoes $2.00 for a 24 pound crate or 8c per pound; cost in the city 25c per pound; advance 300 per cent. Wheat, for which the farmer received one dollar per bushel, when converted into breakfast cereal, sells for 15 cents per pound or $9.00 per bushel, and the steer for which the farmer received $55.00 on the hoof, figured on the basis of prices paid in swell restaurants, runs up to about $2000. That is, the city man pays as much for the steer as the farm on which he was raised is mortgaged for.


text: Page:กม ร ๗ - ๒๔๗๖.pdf/15

title: Page:กม ร ๗ - ๒๔๗๖.pdf/15


text: Page:กม ร ๗ - ๒๔๗๖.pdf/14

title: Page:กม ร ๗ - ๒๔๗๖.pdf/14


text:
Page:CTRL0000034605 - Transcribed Interview of Angela McCallum, (December 8, 2021).pdf/91

91 to correct the attempted theft of this election." Do you see that sentence?

I see it, yes.

Do you recall anyone ever giving you any information regarding the so-called attempted theft of the election, like, what you could point to if someone were to ask you what that meant?

No. And I want to repeat myself. You know, I answered your question about whether or not I'd received background information on this script, and the answer is still no. If anyone ever asked me a question, I would've just made a note of it on a spreadsheet and sent that to—you know, I guess it would be in a shared document with Michael Brown.

And, in the document that you provided your notes, was this document already pre-populated with the different elected officials and so you were just going in and filling in notes?

Can you clarify, particularly the "prepopulated" part? I'm a little confused there.

Yes. So, when you—you said that you filled out a document and put in notes after you called elected officials. Is that right?

Yes. So my name would be—the way that it was laid out is there would be, you know, a senator's name, their contact—senator or representative's name or contact information and, you know, whoever the assigned caller was decided. And we would just basically go in there and say, "Left voicemail," you know, or, if same one actually answered, there would be, you know, a note about what that person said when the phone was answered.

Was there any type of follow up if you had left a voicemail with an elected official?


text:
Page:CTRL0000034605 - Transcribed Interview of Angela McCallum, (December 8, 2021).pdf/92

92 Not on my end, unless, you know, they had texted me after that or something like that. You know, it's not like I ever called them. I don't believe I called anyone more than once.

Do you know if anyone else was following up with elected officials that you were not able to reach?

I don't know.

And I just want to confirm, did you say the calls to the different elected officials from different States happened within about a week's time, end of November, early December? Is that right?

Yeah. I would—and instead of a week, I would probably say a couple of days. Definitely less than a week.

And so the way it went, Mr. Brown would give you all the State, and you had your assignments, and you'd call up the elected officials using the script provided to you?

State, script, contact information, and then, yeah, we would make the calls.

Do you recall how many elected officials that you called in Georgia in connection with the November 2020 election and, you know, using the script?

Me personally?

Yes.

I have no recollection of how many calls I made.

Is it fair to say because it was too many to count?

No. I would attribute it more to the fact that this happened, you know, at this point, it would've been over a year ago. I don't remember, you know, the duration of the event, you know, how extensive it was or anything like that, for any particular State.

And when you were conducting this outreach, this was all on behalf of the


text:
Page:CTRL0000034605 - Transcribed Interview of Angela McCallum, (December 8, 2021).pdf/93

93 Trump campaign, with the elected officials?

As opposed to on behalf of who?

The Republican—the National Republican Senatorial Committee.

Correct. I was doing this for Trump campaign.

And when you were making these phone calls, do you recall where you were?

In Philadelphia, in a hotel room.

Okay. I was just asking because, like, in this script, it says, you know, "calling from Trump campaign headquarters in Washington, D.C.," but you believe you might have been in Philly.

Yes, I was in Philly. And, like I said, I followed the script.

Did you ever contact any elected officials who were not in the spreadsheet that you described?

No.

So your phone calls were limited to your assignments in the spreadsheet?

Yes.

 * BY

I just had a couple of questions for you, Ms. McCallum, about the scripts that we were discussing behind tab 7.

Uh-huh.

So my colleague noted the sentence that says, "This is a clear path to correct the attempted theft of this election."

What did you understand "attempted theft" to be referring to?

Mr. Just to clarify, understand, to put a date on that, at the time that she was provided the script?