The erasure of Islam

(cc) Kivanc

(cc) Kivanc

What Enlightenment? It may have been good for Europe, but for the rest of the world in general, and Islam in particular, the Enlightenment was a disaster. Despite their stand for freedom and liberty, reason and liberal thought, Enlightenment thinkers saw the non-West as irrational and inferior, morally decadent and fit only for colonisation. This legacy is not only with us but is positively thriving in the guise of neo-conservative thought, dogmatic secularism and scientism.

For key Enlightenment thinkers, such as Voltaire, de Montesquieu, Volney and Pascal, Europe occupied a special place: it was to be the destiny of humanity, construed as Western man. They worked hard to provide a rational justification for colonisation. They rationalised the medieval images, anxieties and fear of Islam and its Prophet – so evident in the sections devoted to Muhammad in Pascal’s Pensées – and presented them as evidence for the innate inferiority of Islam. They deliberately suppressed the Muslim contribution to science and learning and severed all intellectual links between Islam and Europe. Their Eurocentricism thus further locked Islam into an exclusive confrontation with the West, which continues to this day.

For thirteen and fourteenth century thinkers of Christendom, such as Roger Bacon and John Wycliff, Islam was simply a pagan, enemy Empire. To their credit, the Enlightenment thinkers saw Islam as a civilisation. But it was a civilisation grounded in a backward society and inferior political institutions and religious beliefs at its core. In Mohammad and Fanaticism, Voltaire denounced Islam in harsh and hostile terms. Later, in the Essai sur les moeurs, he was a little more restrained, but the judgement did not change. He still saw Islam as an embodiment of fanaticism, anti-humanism, irrationalism, and the violent will to power. But despite this, Muslims did have a few positive aspects. They could move towards greater tolerance thanks largely to Islam’s loose sexual standards, which made it akin to a natural religion. While Jesus was good, Christians had become intolerant. But Muslims were tolerant despite their evil Prophet. Positive development in one case, negative in another. This is how Voltaire reconciled his deep seated prejudices about Islam and Muslims with reason.

For all their sabre-rattling against religion, Enlightenment thinkers saw Christianity as the standard of civilised behaviour and norm of all religion. In effect, they further naturalised the natural law theory of medieval Christianity which had always been vague in the sense of never precisely defined, yet also highly specific in being a universalising of Christian norms as the standard for human behaviour. Islam remained the antithesis to Christianity. Thus, in Les Ruines, Volney announced that “Mohammad succeeded in building a political and theological empire at the expense of those of Moses and Jesus’ vicars.” Or, in the scene where he has an imam speaking about “the law of Mohammad”, “God has established Mohammad as his minister on earth; he has handed over the world to him to subdue with the sabre those who refuse to believe in his law.” Volney described Muhammad as the “apostle of a merciful God who preaches nothing but murder and carnage,” the spirit of intolerance and exclusiveness that “shocks every notion of justice”. While Christianity might be irrational, Volney declared that it was gentle and compassionate but Islam had a contempt for science – a truly bizarre claim since Volney himself, and all his fellow Enlightenment thinkers, learnt most of their science and philosophy from such names as al-Frabi, Ibn Sina and ibn Rushd.

While the Enlightenment may have been concerned with reason, its champions were not too worried about truth when it came to Islam. They not only shamelessly plagiarised philosophy, science and learning from Islam, but the very hallmark of Enlightenment, liberal humanism, has its origins in Islam. It is based on the adab movement of classical Islam, which was concerned with the etiquette of being human. Islam developed a sophisticated system of teaching law and humanism that involved not just institutions such as the university, with its faculties of law, theology, medicine and natural philosophy, but also an elaborate method of instruction including work-study courses, a curriculum that included grammar, rhetoric, poetry, history, medicine, and moral philosophy, and mechanisms for the formation of a humanist culture such as academic associations, literary circles, clubs and other coteries that sustain intellectuals and the literati. The adab literature and institutions were, in fact, what enlightenment was all about in Islam. One cannot have a revolt on behalf of reason in Islam because reason is central to its worldview: reason is the other side of revelation and the Qur’an presents both as “signs of God”. A Muslim society cannot function without either. While Muslims can hardly be exonerated for the decline of reason and learning in Muslim civilisation, it was colonialism that as deliberate policy destroyed adab culture in Muslim societies.

But Enlightenment Europe swallowed the adab system, including textbooks, en masse. However, since it was a product of an inferior culture and civilisation its origins had to be shrouded. Thus, classical Arabic had to be replaced with another classical language, Latin. This was followed by a systematic expunging of all traces of the influence of Islamic thought on Europe. From the days of Voltaire right up to 1980, thanks largely to the efforts of Enlightenment scholars, it was a general western axiom that Islam had produced nothing of worth in philosophy, science and learning.

The Enlightenment legacy that Islam and Europe have nothing in common, that Islam is only a darker shadow of the West, that liberal secularism is the destiny of all human cultures, is much in evidence in our newspapers and television, literature and scholarship, as well as in our politics and foreign policies. It is the bedrock of Francis Fukuyama’s “End of History” hypothesis, Samuel Huntington’s “Clash of Civilisation” thesis, and the neo-conservative “Project for the New American Century”. Voltaire’s Bastards, to use the title of John Ralston Saul’s brilliant 1992 book, are busy rationalizing torture, military interventions, and western supremacy, and demonising Islam and Muslims. The Enlightenment may have been big on reason but it was, as Saul shows so convincingly, bereft of both meaning and morality.

Forgive me if I don’t stand up and salute the Enlightenment.

Ziauddin Sardar is the author of Balti Britain: A Journey Through the British Asian Experience (Granta)

Leave a comment ?


  1. The legacy of Islam? They rape and kill women who have a thought or look the wrong way or dress inproper. What a great culture!!

  2. howing wizard, shrieking toad

    Blimey, steady on squire.

  3. Can you pass my support to Ziauddin Sardar?

  4. “Rationality” has been debunked even in western thought. The discipline of economics, for instance, rests entirely on the assumption that people are rational. We have known since at least Freud that people are not. It has taken the recent research of the behavioural economists to demonstrate that economics rests on an untenable proposition: human rationality.

    I have argued in my essay “A Defence of Religion” that unless the west admits humankind’s essential irrationality, the west will be doomed to try to conquer “the irrational” – that is, the rest of mankind.

  5. Well, Arabs are in no position to complain about “erasure”. They are experts at erasing other cultures. Arabs took pains to erase every sign of the influence of the Persian culture, from which they borrowed almost every thing.
    Persian and Iranian Scientists, Philosophers, Physicians, Astronomers and Mathematicians have been so intensely and relentlessly arabicized that most people actually think of them as Arab scientists. For every arab scientist there are at least five scientist that were originally from Iran and from Iranian tribes.

    What goes around comes around.

  6. the binary opposition to enlightenment is delusion – something Europe and its offspring have been suffering from for the last three centuries.

    Ziauddin Sardar thank you.

  7. binary opposition is not a one way street. with the growth of nationalistic thought all parties are guilty of the same. and as ardeshir said (more harshly than i would at least) the knowledge that ibn rushd imparted to the italians indirectly in the 12 and 13th centuries did not spring full formed from his mind. as with any claim that a sole religious group or “race” saved/preserved knowledge that was for the good of all, it would be more accurate to say that they managed not to destroy it. persian physicians and astronomers had already made all the great leaps, and greaco-roman architectural more’s and philosopies; islam managed to realise some of it was good before it was completely destroyed in the violence of its expansion. again, not to say this instance is unique. christianity did a damn good job of anihilating things better kept safe untill it got its act together, as did the humanists and scientists of more recent times.

  8. I suspect that the light shining on the type of reasoning needed to consciously deny such historical truths is going to get even brighter. The enlightened mind of the late Imam W. Deen Mohammed of America, explained the origin of this type of reasoning to his students this way:

    “It all got started when object-reasoning won sway over moral urges, or moral urgings, in the human soul. The serpent, or snake charmed Adam, into accepting to rationalize moral issues, that were in the way of man’s path to world leadership, and world dominance.”

    Its funny how our academic institutions of higher learning don’t make the connection between revealed knowledge and man’s historical recordings.

    The truth is, save for a few, we all have been subjected the same type of magic act that was apparently also played during the “Enlightenment”. Scripture confirms that.

    Thank you Ziauddin for making it easier to connect the dots myself.

  9. Islam expanded by destroying christianity in africa and the middle east and eastern europe. Islam wiped out the culture of the persians.

    If muslims use electricity or computers or bone scanners, are they plaigarising the west?

    why is the author living in the west, since he hates it so much? No other culture accepts so much hatred and criticism. Could a westerner get an article like this published anywhere in his world? Never.

    But the author has a point. The Enlightenment injured the west in many ways. It is the thinking of the enlightenment that allows the author to live in the west and hate it and openly express his hatred. Perhaps we do need to rethink its basic premises.

  10. People has to have some understanding of how developments are passed from one culture to the other.yes,the muslim countries may be living in an oppresive regime,but this has nothing to do with Islamic dogma.was the dark age of Europe the product of christianty and judism??!!
    Think openly to get to the truth..

  11. Links 109 | Cindy's Zone 2 - pingback on February 5, 2013 at 6:43 pm

Leave a Reply