Islamic Renaissance and the Failure
of a Reformation:
a Wrangle Between Philosophy and
Religion
Since the 1980’s, politics within the Muslim
world have played a major role in developing debates over the compatibility of
Islam within the modern world. Recently, the tragic events of 9/11 drew a
greater attention to examining Islamic ideology, and sparked a controversy on
the need for an Islamic Reformation. In light of that, Western scholars, and some
Muslim intellectuals emphasized the urgent need for a comprehensive
restructuring of Islam. Alternatively, religious thinkers opposed such
propositions claiming their insincerity and their inherent secular and Western character.
Others argue that the concept of a reformation is not alien to Islamic history.
They claim that Muslims have recognized and appreciated the concept of reformation
long before the Christians did. In reference to such a viewpoint, scholars questioned
the triumph of such efforts and asserted their failure. Through a historical
examination of Islam, scholars observed that medieval Islamic culture
encompassed a discourse on the philosophy of religion. Moreover, they confirm that
such a discourse articulated hopes for a Reformation. Though, they attribute
the failure of that Reformation to the hypocrisy of political and religious
leaders.
In the beginning,
to understand the concept of Reformation, one must consider the foundations of
the European Reformation. First, throughout the early medieval centuries,
Europe sunk into a period of darkness and ignorance. At that time the only
central authority that united most of Europe was the Papacy of the Catholic
Church at the Vatican. This absence of nation-states ended when various
royalties took control over different regions of Europe. Gradually, conflicts
within the different states and the central church weakened the absolute
authority of the Church. This decline in
the influence of the Catholic Church triggered the European Renaissance.
Furthermore, Renaissance,
as defined by Margoliouth, is the “recovery of classical art (from antiquity),
literature and science, which during the Dark and the earlier Middle Ages had
been neglected” (p. I)[1].
During this period, great intellectual achievements have taken place throughout
Italy as a result of the scientific revival of ancient Roman and Greek science.
The discovery of the works of Galen’s on anatomy and Ptolemy on Geography gave
the birth of new scientific revelations. Leaders of the scientific Renaissance
include Galileo and Da Vinci, whose works formed the basis of modern Science. Moreover,
al-Khowarismy work on Algebra, which reached Europe through the crusades, also
had a great influence on the development of mathematics. In addition, the
interactions with the Muslims through the conquest of Spain introduced
translations of classical Greek philosophy to Europe. The Muslim scholar Ibn-Rushed,
known as Averroës in the west, was the leader of the movement that developed
Aristotle’s scholasticism. This humanistic revival shifted Latin literature to
a new phase.
This new thriving
culture emphasized critical thinking and encouraged skepticism. As a result, new
interpretations of the bible and religious traditions initiated a
spiritual-awakening. This free-thinking approach allowed thinkers to voice
their concerns over the Church’s repressions. Additionally, political tensions
between the Catholic Papacy and the various European states contributed to
greater widespread criticism. Initiated by a few unorganized theologians, such
as Martin Luther, a Revolution against the Church began. With the aid of
religious philosophers, political leaders from Germany and England established
the Reformation[2].
Accordingly, the Reformation
stemmed from long periods of struggle and a series of intellectual revival,
which the Christian World had to undergo to reach such a theological and
political reform. On the other hand, the
existence of many revolutionary campaigns in the Muslim world makes it hard to
agree on a specific period of Reformation or even to define the nature of such
a reformation. This complex and dynamic
nature of political medieval Islam differentiated it from Christianity and, as
a result, the nature of an Islamic Reformation would differ from its Christian
counterpart. Further, Roberson explains that “Islam, as a religion, was able,
through the behavior of its believer, to continually remain cognizant of the
social, economic and political condition of the time it was passing through. It
was like the passage of a long series of intermittent ‘mini-reformations’, all
the while the basic structure of the religion was maintained including the law,
rather than the experience of one great all-mighty reformation as in Europe”[3]. Here
a distinction must be made between the Protestant Reformation in Europe and the
Reformation within the context of Islam. First, unlike the Catholic Church in
Renaissance Europe, the Muslim World lacked a central religious authority.
Secondly, the continuous refusal of the Muslim community to create “further
split” in it eliminates the many difficulties that the leaders of the
Protestant Reformation had to face to separate from Catholicism[4].
In the context of
this paper, an Islamic Reformation corresponds to constructing an inclusive
humanistic approach to theology which allows intellectual criticism and, yet
maintains the central structure of Islam. In other words, a Reformation must
result in a comprehensive and flexible system that preserves the continual
development of the economic, intellectual, social and political status of the
Muslim community and the human civilization. However, there is a current debate
over the concept of an Islamic Reformation. In a private meeting Mrs. Sherine
Ebadi, the first Muslim women to win a Nobel Prize, expressed to me that she
would rather call it an “Islamic Revival.” Her fear emerges from the fact that
the term “Reformation” provokes a greater controversy and hinders the renewal
of Islam, since the term is always associated with the split of Christianity. Nevertheless,
the term “Islamic revival” has recently turned to a cliché that is used by
various movements that extensively differ in their objective. As we will see
later, Revivalism has been associated sometimes with groups that challenged
efforts of Reform. Still, we can define Revivalism as movements that claim to represent
the return to the ‘true and original form of Islam.’
Looking back at
the roots of the Christian Reformation, we saw that the revolution was based on
the intellectual prosperity of the Renaissance. Thus, to study the history of
Reform in Islam we first have to examine the Islamic Renaissance. In the context of Islamic History, Renaissance
refers to the philosophers, scientists and theologians whom works have
contributed profoundly to the emergence of the European Renaissance. This implies
that Renaissance in the Muslim world have started earlier than that of
Europe’s. Antony Black confirms: “the east was intellectually superior to the
West in jurisprudence, mathematics, medicine, astronomy, and philosophy until
around 1200. Early Islam was more open that pre-twelfth century Christendom to
foreign and ancient ideas.”[5] The
Muslims didn’t only translate Greek science and philosophy. However, they also
developed it. Ibn-Sina’s, known as Avicenna in the Latin world, works on
anatomy and medicine rivaled that of Hippocrates and Galen. Similarly,
commentaries of Al-Faraby on Aristotle’s theories added an additional
perspective to early Renaissance Italy. However, the most influential Muslim
thinker was Ibn-Rushed, whose significance was even celebrated by Raphael’s
famous ‘School of Athens’ painting.
To begin with, Al-Faraby
is known to be the first influential philosopher of the Golden Age of Islam. As
with most other Muslim philosophers, Faraby seeked education by himself; “he
didn’t belong to the court, bureaucracy or any literary group”[6].
However, Greek philosophy was introduced to him through a Christian teacher of
the Alexandrian school. Faraby’s revolutionary concept of the philosophical
nature of Prophecy and religion meant that philosophy itself is of divine
nature. While such thoughts heavily conflicted with the Sunni school of
thought, Shiites “enthusiastically adopted al-Faraby’s political ideas”. Faraby saw that “religion is an imitation of
philosophy.” Moreover, because “philosophy demonstrates what religion
symbolizes”, “Philosophy is ‘true education’ and the way to Salvation” [7].
In the later part of his life he wrote his most distinguished books that
constituted the development of Aristotle’s work. His book, the Virtuous City,
represented his detailed vision of the ideal Caliphate. Additionally, he used
Plato’s work to form the basic attributes of a Caliph[8].
In Plato’s
perspective, knowledge was the essential qualifier for leadership. Such view
corresponded to that of the Shiites. Both Shiites and the Faraby believed that
the propagation of knowledge and virtue, which is necessary to the development
of the human civilization, required not only political regulations but a
virtuous leadership. This “affinity between Philosophy and Shi’ism” triggered
the Shiite Hamdanids Caliphate to invite al-Faraby to Aleppo. The construction
of the Houses of Wisdom in Mosul, Aleppo and Tripoli shows the Shiite
appreciation of Greek philosophy. Another reason for al-Faraby’s abandonment of
Baghdad, which was the central intellectual city of his time, is the increasing
popularity of Hanbali Sunnism.
In this regard, Ahmed
Ibn-Hanbal was a theologian that initiated a movement that denied the option of
innovations in dealing with religion. Unlike al-Faraby, Ibn Hanbal believed
that it’s the religious duty of the people to comply with their leader
regardless of his actions with the exception of apostasy and the absence of
communal prayer[9]. In
addition, he denigrated every form of rational speculation. His literary movement
came from his rejection of the rational approach of reading the Quran. This
conflict between traditional Islam and philosophy developed in the Abbasid
Caliphate with the accession of al-Ma’mun. Al-Ma’mun was interested in Greek
philosophy. Therefore, he attracted Shiites and Mu’tazilites, who opposed
literalism. At his time, Baghdad, especially with his construction of the House
of Wisdom, became the center of intellectual discourse. This approach
cultivated philosophers such as Faraby and Avicenna, and equated their academic
status to that of religious scholars. Alternatively, to illustrate his tolerant
policies and theory of Deputyship, Ma’mun deliberately designated the Shiite
eighth Imam, Ali Al-Ridha, as his successor, and retained Mu’tazilte thinkers
in authoritative positions.
This spread of
philosophy and Shiite teachings triggered Ibn-Hanbal to publicly expose his
distaste to philosophers. He taught that philosophers blind individuals from
recognizing the truth, and in this manner, they deviate people from the ‘true
Islam.’ “To call a man a philosopher was still to brand him as a heretic or
infidel”[10] Moreover,
the fierce dispute between philosophers and Hannibal’s Sunni beliefs emerged
when Ibn-Hanbal “took to the streets proclaiming that it was the duty of the
Deputy to command t good and forbid the evil, that is, to enforce the Shari’a
in public life”. In one way or another, this implied that Al-Ma’mun wasn’t fulfilling
his duty as a Caliph. Expectedly, Al-Ma’mun responded with imprisoning Hanbal. Al-Ma’mun’s
action depicts the only occasion in the entire history of Islam in which a Caliph
chooses rationalism prior to religion. In this regard, one can come to see some
resemblance between Philip, the Magnanimous of Renaissance Germany, and
al-Ma’mun. Both championed innovative religious notions and condoned liturgical
attitudes toward religion. Additionally, Al-Ma’mun’s theory of deputyship also resembled
that of the small republics that existed in Italian Renaissance. In this manner,
Al-Ma’mun “adopted a cultural policy that was designed to boost high culture
and the intellectual standing of the Caliphate”[11].Thus,
to Islamic Renaissance, al-Ma’mun was the founder. His initiative of
institutionalizing philosophy as well as his interest to a multiethnic and religiously
variant society corresponded to the only possible Reformation in Islam. For the
first time in any Caliphate, and perhaps the only time, Al-Ma’mun, as a leader,
demonstrated that “the ruler must be loved by his people and combine clemency
with severity”[12]. Indeed, with severity he dealt with literalism
and compassion with those who were tolerant.
As a result of the
thriving intellectual culture in Baghdad, Avicenna came to being. Avicenna believed
not only that philosophy can be superior to religion, but that it can interact
with the human’s active intuition, which he claimed to emanate from God. In
other words, Avicenna meant that regular humans can, through mysticism along
with philosophy, exceed limits and possibly achieve Prophecy. Challenges to Sunnism continued with
al-Razi’s skeptics in concepts such as Revelation and Prophecy. He defied his
Sunni background when “he called Socrates ‘the Imam’”, arguing that if
intellectual enlightenment is sufficient to prove the existence of God, then
“Prophecy and revelation are unnecessary; indeed they are harmful because they
retard knowledge and cause wars”[13].
In comparison, and
in the endorsement of the traditional Sunni school of literalism, Ibn Hazm
composed a love story in which he tried to establish that “plain language” is
the only way one in which one can understand the sacred texts.[14]
Thus, Quran can only have an apparent meaning; allegorical approaches to the
Quran used by Sunni philosophers were deemed unacceptable. Because of his
scholar standing and his position as the Ummayed’s Vizier, Ibn Hazm thoughts on
philosophy gave some legitimacy to the Ummayed’s rule in Spain. As we will see,
the end of the Ummayed’s rule corresponded also to the beginning of rational
thinking in Muslim Spain and the emergence of thinkers such as Ibn Tufail and
Ibn Rushed.
During that period
of time, particularly in the center of the Muslim World, Sunnism school of
thought still didn’t prevail against the campaign of philosophy. It only became
well established when AlGhazaly, around the 11th century, wrote his famous book,
Destructio Philosopherum , condemning the works of Faraby and Avicenna.
Al-Gahzaly got the public’s approval because he relied on his personal
experience. His arguments were based upon his conversations with philosophers,
Shiites, and Sufis. In addition, his book, Revival, also was
revolutionary, since it’s the first time that a theologian truly criticizes the
‘Ulama in their tactics within the political authorities, which focus on the
establishment of the traditional Sunni school instead on the correct
implementation of Shari’a. What’s more, Ghazaly also accepted Sufi thoughts and
indeed embraced them in the latter part of his life. Further, he developed the predominantly
rigid nature of Sunnism to a school of thought that encourages science and
mathematics[15]. This increasing flexibility of Sunnism, together
with his denunciation of philosophy, distinguished Al-Ghazaly and compared his
influence on mainstream Islam to that of Thomas Aquinas in Catholicism. [16]
Both theologians persisted that religion and science, are in fact, related.
On the other side
of the Muslim world, the fall of the Almoravids dynasty in Muslim Spain, which
included the decline of the restrictive Sunni atmosphere, as well as the rise
of the intellectually vibrant environment of Almohads’ Cordova promoted Averroës’
interest in exploring science and philosophy beside Islamic Jurisprudence. His
natural interest in medicine gave birth to his medical encyclopedia, the Colliget.
His companionship with Ibn-Tufail, a philosopher who he shared interest in
medicine with, launched him to embark upon the study of philosophy. The
open-minded theology of Almohads allowed him to further develop his thoughts
without the usual Sunni restrictions.[17]
In Europe, he was considered as the true interpreter of Aristotle. However,
some Christian theologians such as Albertus Magnus, the teacher of Thomas
Aquinas, deemed him “godless and the enemy of Christ.” [18] Again,
this relates to the resemblance of Thomas Aquinas and Al-Ghazaly. Indeed, both
of them, though advocates of science, viewed Averroes’ pure philosophy as
contradictory to the nature of religion. In defense of philosophy, Averroes
wrote a detailed refutation, called the Incoherence of the Incoherence,
to Al-Ghazaly’s degradation of Philosophy.
More than any
other thinkers of his time, Averroes applied and traced his work on Plato’s
politics through Islamic history. This indicated that he, unlike Faraby’s ideal
vision, tried to relate Greek politics into Muslim political history in an
attempt to establish a future change. His unparalleled, both in Europe and the
Muslim world, feminist observations in which he attributed economic regression
to the subordination of women in society, provoked religious leaders to
publicly condemn him. Black explains, “Supporters of Sunni Legalism saw a clear
contradiction between religion and philosophy, and they were now suppressing
the practice of philosophy and persecuting philosophers, including Ibn Rushed
himself”[19]. Markedly, Ibn Rushed was beyond comparison to
all of Islamic thinkers. His Sunni status and his revolutionary ideas
distinguish him as the supreme Islamic thinker. Being a Sunni at that time
implied a certain ideology that Ibn-Rushed clearly transcended while still
adhering to Sunnism. Those reasons illustrate the similarities of Ibn-Rushed
and Martin Luther. This suggests the possibility of Reformation if Ibn-Rushed
were tolerated.
On the other hand,
the Shiite school of thought believed that philosophy and implicit
understanding are the keys to the sincere interpretations of theology. Thus,
the pursuit for a philosophical Islam didn’t die out with Ibn-Rushd’s sad end. In
fact, Shiite theology encouraged the use of philosophy, mathematics, astronomy
and science in interpreting the sacred texts. Al-Tusi exemplified that approach
and developed. Tusi was born in the far eastern end of the Muslim Empire.
Although he was the only thinker of his time, Tusi’s influence exceeded the
boundaries of his Shiite beliefs. First, as a Shiite theologian, unlike his
Sunni cotemporaries, Tusi held that Shari’a isn’t absolute, and that
interpretations by the experts, who he called Mujtahids, are within the scope
of the divine laws. Further, the concept of Ijtihad, which is done by the
Mujtahids, “gave the Shiite legal system flexibility and dynamism; it enabled
new question to be take seriously. Above all, it elevated Reason.”[20] This
individual reasoning resembles democracy, as it enables dialogue over theology within
the Shiite sect, let alone with other Muslim schools of thought. Secondly, his
political theories also embraced an unparalleled democratic thinking within the
Islamic Renaissance. Tusi proposed a political theory of love through which he
“saw the rule by the people as part of virtuous government”.[21] He
believed that “the love of good men for one another” blends and connects different
societies into one civilization. Antony says that “this was the kind of view of
human nature that one would find two centuries later in Italian Renaissance
thinkers”[22] Critics
believed that “Tusi transmitted elements of classical Islamic political
philosophy to the early modern world”[23].
However, a simultaneous but different movement evolved in the center of the
Muslim World after Tusi’s death.
Just as Hanbalism
opposed Faraby and Avicenna in the beginning of the Renaissance, Ibn Taymia’s applied
his dogma in opposition to al-Tusi’s and, thereby ending the Renaissance. Though
he was less literal than Ibn-Hanbal, Ibn-Taymia propagated his teachings by
refuting other schools of thoughts. He engaged in regular disputation with
Shiite leaders. Those controversies influenced his promotion of a Sunni form of
Ijtihad. However, his Ijtihad opposed any innovations. He viewed innovations as
the path of deviation to the ‘errant’ beliefs of Suffism and Christianity[24]. On
the political scope, Ibn-Taymia enforced Ibn-Hanbal’s theory of the religious
political leader. In fact, he loathed the abstention of religious participation
in political authorities. “Ibn Taymia was particularly insistent that religion
cannot be practiced without state power” [25].
In fact, Ibn-Taymia was the first thinker to portray former Islamic Caliphs as
exemplary political rulers. His “special admiration for the first four
Deputies, and also for the Seljuks, Nur al-Din and Salah al-Din and the Mamluk
Sultans,”[26] formed
the basis of the modern historical view of early Islam. In this regard, Ibn-Taymia
disapproved the discussion of the disputes that occurred within the early politics
of Islam. Namely, he prohibited arguments over the Sahaba, or prophet’s
companions; questioning the Sahaba, a Shiite practice, meant deviation from
Sunnism. Thus, Ibn-Taymia was very successful in his attempts of establishing
his model of religious reform. Above all, his main objective was to integrate
religion in every political aspect. His ideal model of the Sahaba and the Salaf,
who are early Islam’s true followers, and his proposition of Ijtihad, came to
balance one another in religious-legal practice. Eventually, the beginnings of
the 14th century marked the end of the age of Renaissance within the
history of mainstream Islam. In particular, the last original thinkers, Tusi,
as a philosopher, and Ibn Taymia, as a religious scholar, concluded the golden
age of Islam.
At the end of such
a review of the complex movements during Renaissance Islam, one wonders what
would have been the implications if Ibn-Rushd’s thoughts were tolerated within
the Muslim community. Would it influence them as it did to their counter
Christians? Although Muslim philosophers were more successful in relating Greek
philosophy to Islam, than the Europeans did to Christianity, the absence of
philosophical institutions which increase communication among the intellectual
community made Islamic Renaissance less coherent than that of Europe.
Intellectual institutions were usually built to solely encompass religious
scholars whom, as usual, rejected philosophical approaches to the sacred text.
Blank asserts that “most philosophers were self-educated.”[27]
We probably can speculate that similar changes to that of Europe would have
taken place only with the tolerance and institutionalization of Philosophy. The
ruling government plays a pivotal role in determining those two circumstances.
Ironically, the
absence of a single, central and tyrannical power, such as the Papacy in
Europe, perhaps, made the Muslims overlook the idea of Reformation.[28]
Islamic leaders didn’t take up extensive power similar to that of the Catholic Church
until the end of Renaissance. Then, influenced mainly by Ibn-Taymia, all
post-Renaissance dynasties, both Shiite and Sunni, became manipulated by
religious authorities. Antony Blank illustrates that “Orthodox-minded ‘Ulama
could charge anyone who showed independence of mind, especially if they
criticized the ‘Ulama themselves, with heresy and unbelief. In such cases, the
Sultan, if he were to maintain his status as religious leader, had to be seen
to act. Sufis were persecuted from time to time and any one who expressed
doubts about the Quran.” Even more, “1n 1580, an observatory as modern as any
in Europe was destroyed, just three years after being built.”[29]
Evidently, Ibn-Taymia’s spreading ideology ensured the failure of any kind of
Reformation. Sultanates’ need for religion to justify their legitimacy made it
difficult for the ruler to exclude religious authorities from the political
realm. As a result, any scientific or intellectual development, such as the
construction of institutions or the funding of research, was based on the
degree of tolerance that Religious authorities rule with.
Although not nearly as sever as the politics
that followed it, Renaissance politics also abused the function of religion to
justify their rule. In our former review of Renaissance leaders, we discussed
three main revivalist movements: Ibn-Hanbal, Al-Ghazaly, and Ibn-Taymia. We
previously saw, that Ibn-Taymia’s post-Renaissance political influence
surpassed that of any other Renaissance philosophers or religious academics.
Nonetheless, the other two thinkers generated critical political changes during
the Renaissance.
First, Hanbalism,
as the first enemy of philosophy, played an important role in developing the
thoughts of the other two movements that followed it. To philosophers, the
Sunni movement represented incoherence and contradictions. Moreover, Hanbalis
claimed that human intellect cannot justify everything in the world, and, in
fact, is not supposed to. Most of the time they would say “ask not how”[30].
Their belief that Shari’a’ law is the divine law that guides human behavior,
implied that “To be moral one virtually must be Muslim”[31].
This theory shattered the unity of the Muslim community because it made Islam
exclusive to a school of thought and alienated non-Muslims from the rest of the
Muslim community. After all, “within the Caliphate itself were many people who
had not embraced Islam, for instance Christians, Jews, atheists, Mazdaans, idolaters,
Buddhists, Gnostics, and son.”[32]Conversely,
philosophers believed that religious differences among a community rather
promote discussion and mutual gain of knowledge. In contrast to philosophy, Ibn
Hanbal’s approach to leadership made Sunnism a perfect religious system that
can maintain its structure through the dynamic nature of Muslim politics. The Suljks
exploited such ideology, especially in dealing with their Shiite enemy, the
Buyids dynasty. With the accession of
the Al-Qadir, the first Seljuk Caliph, execution of non-Sunnis such as
Mu’tazilites and Shiites became the essential tool to end theological and
philosophical disputations. Sourdel comments on the reference of Suljks to
themselves as the ‘champions of Sunnism’, “No one can tell how sincere their
Sunnism was, but what is important is that they could not claim to dominate such
a vast empire without taking up a stance on religious questions.”[33]
Secondly,
al-Ghazaly represented a more moderate, and different approach to traditional
Sunnism that is far from literalism. In fact, al-Ghazaly accommodated science and
increased the capacity of developing the Shari’a within Sunnism. Since he lived
in a Shiite dominant Egypt under the Fatimid rule, it was hard for him to share
his teachings with the public. However, his renewal to Sunni thinking and his
strong arguments against philosophy captured the attention of several political
authorities outside of Egypt. Particularly, al-Ghazaly paved the roads to the
accession of the Ayyubid dynasty in Egypt. “The Ayyubids were devoted advocates
of political Sunnism, and collaborated with the ‘Ulama.”[34] In
fact, Saladin, who is the founder of this dynasty, was proclaimed as “the
restorer of Sunnism in Egypt”[35].
He radically eradicated Shiites and their philosophy in the fear of threats to
his new empire. In this regard, Sourdel
argues that it was only until he established his Muslim Empire that Saladin
thought of recapturing Jerusalem. Sourdel also confirms that Saladin had to engage
in a counter-crusade due to the fact that his denial to the religious leaders’
demands for the restoration of Jerusalem would threaten the legitimacy of his
kingdom[36].
Clearly, each of
the three thinkers had a distinct approach to the character and nature of the
Islamic Law, which depended on his current environment. This demonstrated
Islam’s capability of diverse interpretations even in the most traditional
Sunni school. Such tolerance can also differentiate it from medieval Christian
Catholicism. In the case of Islam, one can generalize that Muslims during the
Renaissance didn’t experience radical narrow-minded manipulations of religion,
as the Christians did in Europe. Hence, they believed that neither Muslims nor
Islam needed a reconstruction.
Again, ruling
kingdoms exploited the people’s faith in the integrity of Islam, and have
always sought to contain knowledge and setup limits to intellectual upbringing.
Unlike religious authorities, their motives were insincere and far from any
concerns with preserving religious authenticity. Incidentally, in an interview
on U.C. Berkeley’s TV channel, Tariqh Ali, editor of the New Left Review, said
“I really do not believe that they want citizens in this world to think. They
don't want that. They want a population which is more or less servile, which
listens to them, accepts all they say, a population which is obsessed with
consumerism and fornication, and carries on doing that. That they don't mind at
all. That's fine. But anything beyond that which challenges them, they more or
less stopped.”[37]
In addition, some
ruling dynasties in the Renaissance made extensive efforts to establish
intellectual institutions. However, their intentions weren’t genuine. For
example, funding institutions and promotion of learning were at the heart of
the Shiite Fatimid rule. In fact, the first university in the Muslim world was
built by them. Through the endorsement to learning, Shiite Fatimids found a diplomatic
strategy that stabilizes their rule over the predominantly Sunni Egyptians.
Unlike the Seljuks, Fatimids intelligently used the propagation of their
teachings in converting Egypt to Shiite majority. Tariqh Ali confirms this in
his analogy of such intellectual manipulation to the recent collapse in the
media. He says “Channel 4, which was set up in 1982 to be an innovative,
critical television channel (it was set up by Parliament) -- by the middle to
end of the nineties had collapsed. A lot of experimental, very good work was
done, but then it came to an end and it's almost as if one can trace this end
to the collapse of the communist enemy; that with the ending of that, it's
almost as if the rulers of this world, the dominant capitalist world, decided,
‘We don't need to educate our citizens so much. We have nothing to be worried
about. If you educate them too much, give them too many opportunities, make
them too vigilant and alert, they might actually turn on us.’ I'm not saying
this is how they thought it concretely, but certainly that's how it seemed to
one, that that's what they were trying to do. The dumbing-down seemed sudden,
that one day the networks were actually quite intelligent, and then six months
later everything had disappeared.”[38]
Surprisingly, the dynamic tool that served political changes in the medieval
ages (i.e. heresy), is still used, and serves similar purposes.
Evidently, a true
Reformation is one that develops within ethical politics. In other words,
regardless of their differences, all Renaissance philosophically-based
political theories were based on the notion of the supremacy of knowledge and
virtue. Clearly, their theories only serve as ideal paradigms that, in reality,
cannot be fully applied. Whether now, or in the medieval ages, politics have
always lacked virtue. Apparently, philosophers themselves realized the
practical failure of their idealist theories which is a clear answer to why
they avoided any actual discussion of the politics of their time. Yet, adopting
a philosophical outlook on religion carries with it a persistent hope for a
virtuous civilization.
In view of that, I
believe that if Ibn-Rushed and Al-Ma’mun coexisted, just like the case with
Philip and Luther, then mainstream Islam of today would be certainly different
than it is now. Our examination to the Renaissance period shows that the concept
of an Islamic Reformation is rooted within the history of Islam. It’s neither a
product of modernism, nor Westernization. In addition, it became evident that
an Islamic Reformation shouldn’t necessarily result in secularism. In fact,
rational reasoning and religion, as Faraby argued, are one entity. However,
what hinders a Reformation is the abuse of censorship. In reference to our
former discussion, we saw that censorship was misused by both politicians and
theologians because it limited intellectual discourse. The former used
censorship to guarantee authority and the latter used it out of ignorance. In
addition, one must be careful not confuse Reformation with modernist movements.
While Reformation can correspond to certain religiosity, modernism entails
secularism, and therefore is more anti-religious. Again, the currently
increasing popularity of an Islamic Reformation is the excessive censorship
that religious authorities and governments impose on the people. The frustration
and anger of Muslims all over the world expresses how they are fed up with
religious deceit and government fabrication. This growing dissatisfaction might
one day develop into a Reformation. Incidentally, Reformation within
Christianity didn’t occur until the 16th century, meaning 1600 years
after its birth. Interestingly enough, the Muslims have just celebrated the 1427th
anniversary of the establishment of their religion. Based on this and the
Muslims’ increasing frustration, one can predict that Islam is on the verge of
a new age: the age of Reformation.
[1] Mez, Adam. The Renaissance of Islam. New York: AMS
Press Inc, 1975. Page I
[2]
“Renaissance.” In: Wikipedia: The Free Encyclopedia. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renaissance
[3]
Roberson, B. A., The Shaping of the Current Islamic Reformation, Portland,
Oregon: Frank Cass Publishers USA, 2003. Page 5.
[4] Safi,
Omid. Encyclopedia of Religion, Modernism: Islamic Modernism. Detroit:
Macmillan Reference USA, 2005, under the subtopic of “An Islamic Reformation?”
[5] Antony
Blank, The History of Islamic Political Thought. New York: Routledge Publishers
USA, 2001. Page 57.
[6] [6] Antony
Blank, The History of Islamic Political Thought. New York: Routledge Publishers
USA, 2001. Page 61
[7] Antony
Blank, The History of Islamic Political Thought. New York: Routledge Publishers
USA, 2001. page 63.
[8] Antony
Blank, The History of Islamic Political Thought. New York: Routledge Publishers
USA, 2001. page 63.
[9] Antony
Blank, The History of Islamic Political Thought. New York: Routledge Publishers
USA, 2001. page 37.
[10]
Patricia Crone, Medieval Islamic Political Thought. Edinburgh: Edinburgh
University Press Ltd UK, 2004. Page168.
[11] Antony
Blank, The History of Islamic Political Thought. New York: Routledge Publishers
USA, 2001. page 26
[12] Antony
Blank, The History of Islamic Political Thought. New York: Routledge Publishers
USA, 2001. page 27
[13] Antony
Blank, The History of Islamic Political Thought. New York: Routledge Publishers
USA, 2001. page 63.
[14] Antony
Blank, The History of Islamic Political Thought. New York: Routledge Publishers
USA, 2001. page 83
[15] Franco
Cardini, Europe and Islam. Malden, Massachusetts: Blackwell Publishers Ltd USA,
2001. Page 92
[16] Antony
Blank, The History of Islamic Political Thought. New York: Routledge Publishers
USA, 2001. page 106
[17] Antony
Blank, The History of Islamic Political Thought. New York: Routledge Publishers
USA, 2001. page 117
[18] Franco
Cardini, Europe and Islam. Malden, Massachusetts: Blackwell Publishers Ltd USA,
2001. Page 92
[19] Antony
Blank, The History of Islamic Political Thought. New York: Routledge Publishers
USA, 2001. page 124
[20] Antony Blank, The History of Islamic
Political Thought. New York: Routledge Publishers USA, 2001. page 150
[21] Antony
Blank, The History of Islamic Political Thought. New York: Routledge Publishers
USA, 2001. page 150
[22] Antony
Blank, The History of Islamic Political Thought. New York: Routledge Publishers
USA, 2001. page 147
[23] Antony
Blank, The History of Islamic Political Thought. New York: Routledge Publishers
USA, 2001. page 152
[24] Antony
Blank, The History of Islamic Political Thought. New York: Routledge Publishers
USA, 2001. page 153
[25] Antony
Blank, The History of Islamic Political Thought. New York: Routledge Publishers
USA, 2001. page 153
[26] [26]
Antony Blank, The History of Islamic Political Thought. New York: Routledge
Publishers USA, 2001. page 157
[27] Antony
Blank, The History of Islamic Political Thought. New York: Routledge Publishers
USA, 2001. page 60
[28] Antony
Blank, The History of Islamic Political Thought. New York: Routledge Publishers
USA, 2001. page 143
[29] Antony
Blank, The History of Islamic Political Thought. New York: Routledge Publishers
USA, 2001. page 215
[30] Antony
Blank, The History of Islamic Political Thought. New York: Routledge Publishers
USA, 2001. page 83.
[31] Antony
Blank, The History of Islamic Political Thought. New York: Routledge Publishers
USA, 2001. page 84
[32] Maurice
Lombard, The Golden Age of Islam. New York: American Elsevier Publishing
Company USA, 1975. Page 97.
[33]
Dominique Sourdel, Medieval Islam. Boston: Routledge & Kegan Paul USA 1983.
Page182.
[34] Antony
Blank, The History of Islamic Political Thought. New York: Routledge Publishers
USA, 2001. page 109
[35] Antony
Blank, The History of Islamic Political Thought. New York: Routledge Publishers
USA, 2001. page 144.
[36]
Dominique Sourdel, Medieval Islam. Boston: Routledge & Kegan Paul USA 1983.
Page183.
[37] Ali,
Tariqh. Islam, “Empire and the Left” In: Conversations with History. The
Institute of International Studies, University of California at Berkeley. May
8, 2003
[38] Ali,
Tariqh. Islam, “Empire and the Left” In: Conversations with History. The
Institute of International Studies, University of California at Berkeley. May
8, 2003
Bibliography
- Black, Antony. The History of Islamic Political
Thought. New York: Routledge, 2001.
- Lombard, Maurice. The Golden Age of Islam. New
York: American Elsevier Publishing Company, 1975.
- Crone, Patricia. Medieval Islamic Political
Thought. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2004.
- Roberson, R.A. Shaping the Current Islamic
Reformation. Portland, OR: Frank Cass, 2003.
- Cardini, Franco. Europe and Islam. Malden, MA:
Blackwell Publishers, 2001
- “Renaissance.” In: Wikipedia: The Free
Encyclopedia. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renaissance
