Answer to Ernst Renan' (1883) by Jamal al-Din al-Afghan

In truth, the Muslim religion has tried to stifle science and stop its progress. It has thus succeeded in halting the philosophical or intellectual movement and in turning minds from the search for scientific truth. A similar attempt, if I am not mistaken, was made by the Christian religion, and the venerated leaders of the Catholic Church have not yet disarmed, so far as I know. They continue to fight energetically against what they call the spirit of vertigo and error. I know all the difficulties that the Muslims will have to surmount to achieve the same degree of civilization, access to truth with the help of philosophic and scientific methods being forbidden them. A true believer must, in fact, turn from the path of studies that have for their object scientific truth, studies on which all truth must depend, according to an opinion accepted at least by some people in Europe. Yoked, like an ox to the plow, to the dogma whose slave he is, he must walk eternally in the furrow that has been traced for him in advance by the interpreters of the law. Convinced, besides, that his religion contains in itself all morality and all science, he attaches himself resolutely to it and makes no effort to go beyond. Why should he exhaust himself in vain attempts? What would be the benefit of seeking truth when he believes he possesses it all? Will he be happier on the day when he has lost his faith, the day when he has stopped believing that all perfections are in the religion he practices and not in another? Wherefore he despises science.
[…] It is permissible, however, to ask oneself why Arab civilization, after having thrown such a live light on the world, suddenly became extinguished; why this torch has not been relit since; and why the Arab world still remains buried in profound darkness. Here the responsibility of the Muslim religion appears complete. It is clear that wherever it became established, this religion tried to stifle the sciences and it was marvelously served in its designs by despotism.
[…] Realizing, however, that the Christian religion preceded the Muslim religion in the world by many centuries, I cannot keep from hoping that Mohammadan society will succeed in breaking its bonds and marching resolutely in the path of civilization someday after the manner of Western society, for which the Christian faith, despite its rigors and intolerance, was not at all an invincible obstacle.

Excerpt from: Imperialism, Science and Religion: Two Essays by Jamal al-Din al-Afghani, 1883 and 1884.

Despite his name, Jamāl al-Dīn al-Afghānī (1838-1897) was born in Iran in a Shiite religious family. Western sources described him as a "political activist" and a fierce defender of the cause of Muslim populations. As a great traveller, he went to London, Paris and St. Petersburg, and also travelled from India to Cairo. Al-Afghānī had a major influence on the first phase of Muslim reformism, with 'Abduh (1849-1905) and Rashīd Ridā in Egypt, and with Iqbāl (1877-1938) in India. He was called the “Awakener of the East”, and his disciples would make him the forerunner of the pan-Arab struggle against Western imperialism and the pioneer of the revival of Islam.
Under which circumstances were these lines written? In 1883, al-Afghānī came to Paris to seek help in his struggle against British imperialism. In a famous letter written for an educated audience and sent to a main French newspaper, he responded to the conference given by Renan on “Islam and science” at the Sorbonne on 29 March 1883. In this conference, Renan supported the idea of "the decadence of States ruled by Islam and the intellectual nullity of races whose culture and education are only based on this religion." In his inaugural lecture at the Collège de France (a premier higher education and research establishment) in 1862, Renan had already given on Islam a judgment widely shared by his contemporaries: "Islam is the most complete negation of Europe; Islam is fanaticism (...). Islam is the disdain of science, the suppression of civil society." To escape attacks from conservative Muslims, al-Dīn al-Afghānī refused that his political text, published in the Journal des débats (Newspaper of Debates) on 18 May 1883, was translated into Arabic.
In its response to Renan, he reminded his readers of the brilliant scientific and philosophical heritage of Islam, and also reminded them that Islam was not the only religion to slow down scientific progress. Al-Afghānī was referring to the conservatism of the Catholic Church and its rejection of the ideas of progress, rationalism and republic. Like most of his contemporary Arab scholars, he believed in the progress of civilization enlightened by reason. The peoples were delivered from the state of barbarism by religion, and religion was a transitional stage to civilization. However, al-Afghānī did not share all his thoughts on Islam and science in his text written for a cultivated Western audience. In 1881, he also defended the superiority of Islam in his book Refutation of the Materialists. In this book, he mentioned some enemies of Islam "denying the divinity", in particular the philosophers of the Enlightenment and Darwin. Science was only acceptable in the context of the prophetic revelation. For al-Afghānī, the salvation of the community of believers was conditioned by the return to the “Truth” of Islam.

Rejection of the taqlid and defense of the 'ijtihad, by Muhammad Rashid Rida

By the rejection of taqlīd*, we do not mean that every Muslim can possibly become a Mālik or Shāfi'ī in deriving the juridic rules relating to the communauty, or that everyone ought to do so. We mean only that every Muslim is obligated to reflect on the Qur'an and to be guided by it in accordance with his abilities. It is never permissible for a Muslim to abandon it and to turn away from it, or to prefer, over what he understands of its guidance, the words of anyone else be it a mutjahid* or a pratictioners of taqlīd […]
If Muslims had stood firm in reflecting on the Qur'an and in being guided by it in every age, their morals and manners would not have been ruined, their rulers would not have been despotic, their authority would not have declined.

*Taqlīd: imitation and total acceptance of a legal authority’s advice.
*Mujtahid: Muslim whose knowledge of religious sciences allows him to interpret Islamic law by giving a reasoned personal opinion (ijtihād).

Excerpt from Tafsīr al-Manār 5, 297 by Muhammad Rashīd Ridā

Rashīd Ridā (1900-1935), a Syrian scholar, was a disciple of al-Afghānī and of Muhammad 'Abduh. An energetic personality, Ridā multiplied conferences, publications and refutations. With 'Abduh - a reformist religious scholar -, he founded the journal al-Manār. The commentary of the Quran in twelve volumes, known under the name Tafsīr al-Manār, was the collective work of scholars writing in al-Manār, and covered almost a third of the Quran. This was the first major tafsīr [see Islam module I page 4] since the middle of the 19th century. It was intended for Muslims living in the 20th century to guide them towards “the reform (islāh): religious reform (dīnī), civil reform (madanī), political reform (siyāsī). The journal fulfilled two obligations (farīdatān): defense and propagation of Islam, and call for the unity of Muslims” (excerpt by Ridā).
In his exegesis, Ridā recalled that the 'ijtihad [see Islam module I page 7] was a Koranic injunction and an obligation for every Muslim. This legal practice was not restricted to the specialist (mujtahid). Every Muslim should exercise its reasoning in accordance with the principles of Islamic law (sharī'a). The taqlīd of the tradition was opposed to the tajdīd (renewal). The “servile” taqlīd stuck Islam in stagnation, and was considered the main cause of the decline of the Islamic world, despite the harmony of Islam with scientific reason.

Islam and the Foundations of Governance

The authority that the Prophet had on the believers was an extension of his prophetic mission and did not include any of the characteristics of temporal power.
With certainty, there was no government, no State, no political trends, and no aiming of kings or princes!
(…) The title of “caliph” (successor and vicar of the Prophet) and the circumstances that accompanied its use (...) were among the causes of the error that has spread among the mass of Muslims, leading them to consider the caliphate a religious function and to give to the one who takes the power among Muslims the rank occupied by the Prophet himself. (...) It is in the interest of kings to disseminate such illusion in the population, in order to use religion as a means of defense of their thrones and a means of repression of their opponents.
(…) This is the crime of kings and the result of their despotic domination: in the name of religion, they have lost the Muslims, concealed to their eyes the ways of truth and obstructed the light of knowledge. In the name of religion, they have fooled them and created all sorts of obstacles to intellectual activity, to the point of preventing them from having any reference system whatsoever, outside of religion.
 (…) No religious principle forbids Muslims to compete with other nations in all social and political sciences. Nothing prohibits them from destroying this antiquated system that has depreciated them and benumbed them in its grip. Nothing prevents them from building their State and their system of government based on the latest creations of the human mind and on the basis of systems of government the strength of which has been proven.

'Alī Abd al-Rāziq, Islam and the Foundations of Governance (1925).

The question of the caliphate - seldom addressed in books of Islamic jurisprudence - was the source of the first major divisions and schisms of Islam after the death of Muhammad in 632. Fourteen centuries later, the caliphate was abolished in Turkey in a law dated 3 March 1924. This important event was a break from the Sunni Islamic power ruling the country since the 7th century. This situation - never experienced before in the Muslim world - raised debates and a review of the institution in the 1920s. Was it the beginning of the era of modern political regimes? Should the caliphate be restored? In favor of which authority and which people?
'Alī Abd al-Rāziq belonged to a large Egyptian family. A graduate of al-Azhar in 1911, he took a stand against Muslim theories on the caliphate power, based on secular concepts and historical models. The performance of this power was deeply rooted in the historical and religious awareness of Muslims. Some scholars would argue that the caliph received his authority from God. Others scholars would argue that his power was based on the consensus (ijma') of the community. Published in 1925, the book of 'Alī Abd al-Rāziq immediately raised violent reactions in the press and refutations. The author was excluded from the body of 'ulamā’s.
In which context was this book published? In the aftermath of the First World War, the redistribution of Western zones of influence in Muslim countries reinforced Arab nationalism. Mass political parties emerged, such as the Wafd in Egypt, based on a nationalist, liberal and secularist programme. Officially independent in 1922, Egypt was put de facto under British control, and adopted a constitutional monarchy in 1923. The caliphate was abolished, destabilizing the Muslim world.
‘Alī Abd al-Rāziq studied the question of power in Islam upon his return from an academic stay at Oxford. After a rigorous demonstration based on the texts of the Tradition and on the history of the caliphate since the Rightly Guided, he raised the question of the origin and nature of the caliphate. He also outlined other Muslim theories, from ibn Khaldūn to his contemporary Rashīd Ridā.
His argumentation was based on three points:
- Muhammad was invested with a prophetic mission to deliver a message. This mission ended with his death. His immense power – exceptional, like the power of all prophets – did not inaugurate a particular form of government.
- Post-prophetic Islam erected the Rightly Guided as a model of government. The Tradition sacralized this reference. Theologians decided that the caliphate institution was a necessary condition to the general good and to proper conduct of worship.
- The caliphate was a human and political institution that had no link to religion. The caliphate of the Rightly Guided was a moment in history. It was extended by an imperial caliphate based on "repressive force" with a despotic power.
Abd al-Rāziq concluded by stating the need to separate religion from the exercise of power, and invited Muslims to create modern political systems based on reason.