By Macksood Aftab

One of the commonly accepted theories of Islamic history states that after an early period of rise Islamic civilization subsequently went into a long period of decline.  A decline caused primarily due to a flawed theology adopted by medieval Muslims.  This has recently been adopted by right-wing Islamophobic thinkers to imply that Islam is a fundamentally regressive religion. This narrative, however, is deeply flawed and runs contrary to the best historical evidence.

The Standard Narrative

Imam Al-Ghazali

This standard theory states that the first approximately 500 years of Islam were the golden age.  In this period Greek science and philosophy was actively translated and studied in the Muslim world.  This resulted in a spectacular flourishing of Islamic civilization.  The great works of Ibn Sina in Medicine and Philosophy, Ibn Haytham in Optics, Al-Khawarzmi in Mathematics and Al-Biruni in Biology were written.    Soon thereafter, Islamic theologians reasserted the primacy of revelation over reason and a sharp decline in the intellectual output of the Muslim world occurred.

The theory of Islamic decline has been so dominant and well accepted that the only question which is asked is “what caused the decline?”  Many reasons are given, several of which are chronicled in popular books like What went wrong?  By Bernard Lewis.  The most popular reason cited is the rise of “conservative religious forces”  which led to a “narrow, rigid and closed”  interpretation of Islam and actively hindered the growth of science.   The chief culprit they identify is the influential Islamic theologian Abu Hamid Al-Ghazali (d. 1111 CE).  One of the most influential and often-quoted Orientalist scholars E. C. Sachau writes:

The fourth [tenth] century is the turning point in the history of the spirit of Islam… But for Al-Ashari and Al-Ghazali the Arabs might have been a nation of Galileos, Keplers, and Newtons.

Numerous scholars , perhaps owing to this early Orientalist literature, have adopted a similar view ranging from the historian Toby Huff to the famous scientist Pervez Hoodbhoy .   This sentiment has translated into the standard history of science.  Thus we see the Nobel-prize winning scientist Steven Weinberg writing,

Alas, Islam turned against science in the twelfth century. The most influential figure was the philosopher Abu Hamid al-Ghazzali…. After al-Ghazzali, there was no more science worth mentioning in Islamic countries.

Perhaps it is only natural for Ghazali to be singled out for critique due to his stature within Islamic intellectual history.  Richard Frank describes his role as:

Al-Ghazali dominates the history of Muslim thought, and even though so categorical an assertion may be subject to qualification, there is no denying that he was the most important sunni theologian at a crucial turning point in the history of orthodox Muslim theology.  

Although this article will deal primarily with Islamic science, Ghazali is also held responsible for the presumed “closure of the gates of ijtihad” which supposedly occurred around the same time . Furthermore, he is felt to have dealt a fatal blow to the field of Islamic philosophy.   

This view has been conveniently adopted by right-wing ‘scholars’ who are happy to point out the intrinsic problems with Islam as a religion and its supposed inability to cope with science, complexity and modernity.  This can be seen in the attitude of Steven Weinberg himself who goes on to blame modern day terrorism on this supposed development.   The atheist and Islam-critic Richard Dawkins also subscribes to a similar view.  Populist works such as The Closing of the Muslim Mind: How Intellectual Suicide created the modern Islamist crisis by Robert R. Reilly published as recently as 2010 continue to propagate this myth.  In it Reilly writes,

Were it not for al-Ghazali, Averroes and rationalism might have won the battle for the Muslim mind.  But it did not happen, and, as a result, the Sunni Muslim mind suffered the consequences. It closed.

Bias and Ignorance

This normative view of Islamic history has, however, been seriously challenged recently due to a reexamination of the historical literature.   This renewed study of Islamic intellectual history suggests instead of a decline, a brilliant renaissance of intellectual and scientific thought took place in Islam after Ghazali.

The theory of decline was largely a byproduct of Orientalist literature.  Their interests lie not in a genuine study of Islamic civilization, but a focus on its role in the subsequent rise of western civilization.    Professor Berggren identifies the problem when he writes that the “treatment of medieval Islam as a civilization deserving of attention only for its role as a channel through which the great works of the Greeks were carried safely to the eager minds of the European Renaissance” results in “selective and tendentious reading of medieval Arabic texts to show how Islamic science prefigured that of modern times.” 

The assumption that Greek science was the impetus behind rise of Islamic science has also been recently seriously questioned.  The beginnings of Islamic science predated the translation movement.  For example, George Saliba points out that it would be impossible to translate Greek scientific texts unless a highly sophisticated scientific vocabulary already existed in Arabic, implying a preexisting robust scientific tradition.   Evidence also points to the fact that Islam’s engagement with Greek thought was always a critical one, not a passive and accepting one.   This is true even when we look at the so called “neo-platonic” thinkers such as Ibn Sina who was highly critical of Aristotle, openly rejecting many of his ideas.  

In fact, this moving away from the Greek tradition, “de-hellinization” within Islam as the sciences become more and more “Islamic” is seen by many as a move against reason .  However, here again this is largely based upon the assumption that “Islamic” implies anti-reason, and not on any empirical evidence.  The evidence on the contrary suggests a rich tradition of Islamic science developing within the context of a rational Islamic theology.

Much of the published research into Islamic science exists from the period prior to the scientific revolution in the West since this was naturally of most interest to western scholars.  This attitude has resulted in a sharp drop off in the amount of academic research into the later Islamic period.  Therefore, until recently we knew very little about what happened to Islamic science after the supposed decline took place.  In a lecture delivered at MIT, Syed Hossein Nasr emphasizes the same point when he writes,

There are over three thousand manuscripts of medicine in India which have never been studied by anybody. This is [only] the tip of the iceberg. There are thousands of manuscripts in Yemen which we don’t even know about.

Professor Dimitri Gutas points out that the patronage of science and the resulting scientific works in the later Ottoman period have been “almost completely unresearched.”   The respected historian of Islamic science, Muzaffar Iqbal writes:

So far we know of at-least 1000 scientists who worked between the eighth and eighteenth centuries; there are thousand more about whom we have no information or whom we merely know the names and their works’ titles.  There are over 200,000 manuscripts in Iran alone, of -which about three-quarters are as yet uncatalogued.

What Decline?

As this research is being conducted a new view of Islamic intellectual history is developing.  Evidence points to continued vibrancy and rigorous scientific activity flourishing for centuries after Ghazali.  Recently, Professor Ekmeleddi Ihsanoglu has documented that significant scientific activity continued in the Ottoman Empire well into the eighteenth century.  Professor Jamil Ragep at McGill has documented the accomplishments of Muslim scientists in the later period including hundreds of students engaged in creative theoretical and practical science at the great observatories at Maragha and later in Samarqand.  He writes,

During the past half century or so, an ever-increasing body of scholarly work has shown that science in Islam not only continued after al-Ghazali but in fact flourished for centuries thereafter.  Over the next five centuries or so, one can document the production of thousands of scientific and philosophical texts in both the eastern and western Islamic world that are attested by tens of thousands of extant manuscripts.

Many important discoveries occurred in this later period such as:  “discovery of the pulmonary transit (of blood from the heart to the lungs and back), precise determinations (up to fifteen decimal places) for Π and sin 1º, and map-projection techniques of remarkable accuracy and sophistication.”   He points out that recently the quasi-crystalline Penrose pattern has been discovered in the architecture in Isfahan centuries before it was described by Penrose in 1975.   He writes, “Given that less than 5% of the available material has been studied, it would seem that future research will bring to light many other discoveries.”  Much of the works recently studied relate to Astronomy.   Professor Lindberg in his Beginnings of Western Science writes,

Current archival research in the history of Islamic astronomy reveals decisively that at least this specific discipline flourished well into the sixteenth century—producing a continuous flow of knowledgeable, sometimes brilliant, astronomers, scatters throughout greater Islam.  As for the other sciences thousands of Arabic, Persian and Turkish manuscripts remain in libraries from Europe to the Middle East, unexamined.  What they may contain we have no way of knowing until we look.  

Echoing the same findings Abdelhamid Sabra (Emeritus professor of Arabic science at Harvard) and Hogendijk extends the period of growth into the nineteenth century.  They write,

The Islamic tradition in the exact sciences continued well into the nineteenth century, and abundant source material is available in the form of unpublished manuscripts in Arabic, Persian, and other languages in libraries all over the world.”

Yale professor George Saliba terms the post-Ghazali period the real golden age of Islam.  He describes the brilliant scientific production in this period as nothing short of a renaissance. This leads Saliba to ask if Ghazali was responsible for the decline of science, then how does one explain the:

Production of tens of scientists in every discipline, who continued to produce scientific texts that were in many ways superior to the texts that were before the time of Ghazali.  In the case of astronomy, one cannot even compare the sophistication of the post-Ghazali texts with the pre-Ghazali ones, for the former were in fact far superior both in theoretical mathematical sophistication, as well as in blending observational astronomy with theoretical astronomy.  

Although it is beyond the scope of this article, it is worth pointing out that similar progress after Ghazali can been seen in other fields.  For example, with regards to Islamic law professor Wael Hallaq writes,

It is our common, but rather inaccurate, belief that during the first three centuries of Islam, the highest and final stage of legal thought had been reached.  It may be astonishing, therefore, to realize that the sophistication of technical legal thought was in fact achieved after these centuries…

Professor Saliba points out those Orientalist scholars could not see the originality in the post-Ghazali books, even though they read them carefully, simply because they were not looking for any such originality.  The phenomenon is best seen in the context of the commentary literature, which is often construed as redundant learning, lacking in originality.  In reality, Saliba argues, commentaries served a purpose similar to modern-day periodicals advancing knowledge in their respective fields and were in some ways superior to them, requiring a synthesis of all prior knowledge. 

Contrary to the early Orientalist literature instead of demolishing science, Ghazali’s theology actually secured a place for science within an Islamic framework.  The metaphysical basis for this requires a separate article.  Suffice it to point out that neither Ghazali’s denial of necessary causality, nor his support of Ashari theology in anyway undermined prospects for rational inquiry within the Islamic context.  In fact, these positions actually stimulated scientific activity.   Ahmad Dallal summarizes its consequences when he writes,

After Al-Ghazali, the need to invoke religion to vindicate science considerably decreased, not because science was not accepted but because it did not need vindication.

Unlike in Europe where scientists were often persecuted by the Church , Islamic theologians actually created an environment which allowed science to flourish.  This is not to say that there were never any religious objections to science in Islam, indeed there were occasionally.   However, as professor Gutas points out these were relatively isolated incidents, the exception and not the rule.

If Muslims were so advanced, then one may ask, why then were the Europeans able to colonize and dominate the Muslim world?  Historians such as Ahmad Dallal argue this was largely due to an economic imbalance created by Europe’s discovery of the resource rich New World combined with emerging capitalism and the strategic deployment of new technologies.  The willingness of the Europeans to use these powerful technologies for the unprecedented exploitation of human and natural resources also played a role.  This late decline was not necessarily due to a structural or intellectual deficiency within the Islamic world.   In other words, traditional Islamic civilization’s ultimate demise late in the 19th century was largely due to factors extrinsic, not intrinsic, to its intellectual fabric.

Conclusion

Historical research now underway exposes the biases of the very influential early Orientalist scholarship on Islamic history and completely undermines the arguments of right-wing Islamophobic “scholars,” who would like to insist that something inherent about Islam’s theology resulted in its own demise.  Professor Lindberg summarizes the issue as follows:

The truth is that the image of decline in the twelfth to fifteenth centuries is not the product of research in manuscript archives, but an assumption made in the absence of research and encouraged for its usefulness as a tool in religious polemics over the relative merits of Islam and Christianity: which religious culture wins the natural sciences sweepstakes?”

Much research still needs to be done in to Islam’s rich scientific and intellectual heritage which clearly flourished well beyond its supposed golden age.  The research needs to be historicized and done in an objective manner keeping in mind Islam’s own worldview.  It is premature, even absurd, to ask, let alone answer, questions such as “what caused the Islamic decline?”   A false question propagated by those with little genuine interest in Islamic history.  Professor Nasr writes, “Muslims have not yet developed their own historiography of science.”     As this develops, many of our assumptions regarding the history of Islam might be overturned.  This may lead Muslims to seek to revive elements of its intellectual heritage.  Indeed, we might more rightfully ask, “what was it about Islamic civilization that caused science, philosophy, medicine, and law to flourish in its lands for well over 1000 years?”

Visit www.muslimphilosophy.com/aftab for a complete annotated version of this article.

15-51

By Noor H. Salem

Saturday December 7th definitely marked history for the Al-Maghrib Institute. More than 1,800 attendees gathered in the Adoba Hotel of Dearborn, MI for the day long ILMFest event- The festival of knowledge.

The grand ballrooms were packed from corner to corner, facing the stage lightened with purple lights. This is the first ILMFest that sold out a week in advance, and these events have been occurring in various cities across the globe. Historically, it’s the first ILMFest that didn’t have to put an “onsite registration” line the day of the confrence. Attendees all the way from Florida, North Carolina, Illinois, and Ohio came to attend this one day event.The hall way was filled with about 20 vendors, many coming from out of state too. Some were selling products, advertising for their companies, or selling tickets to an upcoming event.

7 speakers flew in from out of state, leaving their families to come join this remarkable conference. The event began 10 AM with a few local speakers. Boona Mohammed was the host, and did a remarkable job keeping humor in the air. Every speaker gave words of wisdom on refocusing your life, keeping the audience at awe. There was a lunch break, in which the majority ran out and grabbed lunch. At this time, the speakers and a few VIP members from the community were invited for a private lunch in one of the halls in the Hotel. Right next to that hall, was the Shuyookh VIP Room- themed and decorated nicely for them to feel at home. A fruit and snack arrangement awaited them, along with drinks, dates, nuts, and sabaya trays.

“This has been the best ILMFest I’ve attended,” said Sheikh Omar Suleiman in the VIP Room, as volunteers and speakers gathered post the conference. Over 60 volunteers, both female and male, previously dedicated months of preparation to host this one day conference. Whether it was being hospitable to speakers, preparing lunch, setting up the hall, or selling tickets, every individual but in effort and dedication to make sure thing went smooth. After the conference, the hall emptied out quickly. Volunteers had a meeting with the shuyookh, discussing pros and cons of the day. Speakers were impressed at this ILMFest, compared to other ones they have attended. They felt the day went smooth, ushering was very organized, and overall nice set-up. After a light dinner with the shuyookh, volunteers began cleaning up the hall. Some volunteers stayed past 2AM doing last minute clean up. At the end of the day, every individual gains his/her reward- and we ask that it is accepted from each and every speaker, volunteer, and attendee.

15-51

By Rania El Gamal

Former Head of Saudi intelligence and current Saudi King Faisal Center for Research and Islamic Studies Chairman Prince Turki Al Faisal Al Saud attends a close session meeting at the IISS Regional Security Summit – The Manama Dialogue in Manama, December 8, 2013. REUTERS/Hamad I Mohammed

KUWAIT (Reuters) – Saudi Arabia’s dream of binding the Gulf Arab states into a union will get a skeptical hearing at a summit this week, with differences over Iran, Egypt and Syria demonstrating that the Gulf’s absolute monarchs do not all speak with one voice.

Saudi Arabia’s King Abdullah proposed two years ago for a stronger union with Bahrain, Kuwait, Qatar, Oman and the United Arab Emeriates. The plan is expected to be one of the main topics on Tuesday when the leaders of the Gulf Cooperation Council hold their annual meeting in Kuwait.

But just days before the leaders were due to arrive, Oman dismissed the proposal with unusual directness in a region where the royal courts are usually not known for their bluntness.

“We are not for establishing a union at all,” Foreign Minister Youssef bin Alawi bin Abdullah said on Saturday at a conference in Bahrain, shortly after a Saudi official had renewed Riyadh’s call for closer unity.

Saudis shrugged off the sign of disagreement: “Oman has every right to express that view. I don’t think that is going to prevent the union from happening,” former Saudi intelligence chief Prince Turki al-Faisal said in Bahrain.

“Having a more closely knit union between the GCC countries in my view is inevitable and whether Oman wants to join now, or later, that’s up to them.”

Diplomats in the region say the Omanis are not the only skeptics: the UAE and Kuwait also expressed reservations at last year’s summit behind closed doors, they say.

Despite the similarities of the six Gulf monarchies, they have diverging regional outlooks, economies and political systems. The others are increasingly gaining the confidence to veer off a script written by Saudi Arabia, which has by far the biggest economy and more citizens than the other five combined.

“A number of Gulf states view Saudi Arabia as the gorilla in the room. Much as they have a lot in common with them, they don’t want to be dominated by the Saudis,” said Robert Jordan, U.S. ambassador to Riyadh from 2001-03.

“Given the somewhat divergent attitudes on Iran, and to a lesser extent Syria, it may be harder to get common ground in a shared foreign policy.”

IRAN

The GCC was set up in 1981 to counter the rise in the region of non-Arab Shi’ite Iran, which Riyadh views as its principle rival for hegemony in the Gulf and wider Middle East. But though all six members are somewhat suspicious of Iran, Oman and Qatar have made moves to seek better ties with Tehran.

Oman went even further in the past year, hosting secret meetings between Iranian and U.S. officials which helped lead to a nuclear pact last month – a deal that had Saudis fuming.

“I think there is going to be more tension within the GCC because the prospect of Iran’s rehabilitation into the region does introduce a new set of tensions because the Gulf countries don’t have the same policies towards Iran,” said Shadi Hamid of the Brookings Institute in Doha.

Oman has always been an outlier in the group, with a unique Indian Ocean maritime culture. Its predominating Ibadi sect of Islam differs both from the Sunni sect of the other Gulf ruling houses and the Shi’ism of Iran.

But other members have also veered from consensus. Qatar, an increasingly confident upstart which earned energy riches more recently than the others, has irked neighbors with bold foreign policy moves, especially since the 2011 “Arab Spring” revolts when it backed movements linked to the Muslim Brotherhood.

Qatar provided billions of dollars of funding for Egypt when it elected a Brotherhood government last year, even though other Gulf monarchs were alarmed at the movement’s rise.

This year, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and the United Arab Emirates made their opposing views on Egypt plain by pledging $12 billion in aid to Cairo after the military toppled the Brotherhood.

On Syria, Qatar and Saudi Arabia have shared leading roles arming and funding rebels seeking to overthrow President Bashar al-Assad. But although they are on the same side in the war, Western diplomats say they have backed rival rebel groups.

Domestically, there are political differences as well. While all six GCC states are ruled by dynasties that wield ultimate power, Kuwait, Bahrain and Oman have ceded some political influence to elected parliaments, something that seems far off in Saudi Arabia, Qatar or the UAE.

Bahrain, though ruled by a Sunni Muslim family, has a Shi’ite majority, which means it treads a more difficult line. During the Arab Spring it was the only one of the six to see major unrest, which it and its allies blamed on Iran.

The six also differ economically, which complicates efforts to unite them. While all have oil, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and the UAE are rich OPEC members; Oman and Bahrain are poorer.

Qatar and the UAE are high-profile global traders with gleaming skyscrapers at home and airline logos emblazoned on soccer shirts abroad. Saudi Arabia, though the richest of all, needs its wealth at home to support a much larger population.

Oman said as early as 2006 that it would not join an as yet unrealized project to unite the countries under a single currency. The UAE, which sees itself as a main rival to Riyadh for dominance in regional finance, has also rejected the scheme, which would involve a Gulf central bank based in Riyadh.

(Additional reporting by William Maclean in Manama and Angus MaDowall in Riyadh; Writing by Rania El Gamal; Editing by Peter Graff)

15-51

By Macksood Aftab

One of the commonly accepted theories of Islamic history states that after an early period of rise Islamic civilization subsequently went into a long period of decline.  A decline caused primarily due to a flawed theology adopted by medieval Muslims.  This has recently been adopted by right-wing Islamophobic thinkers to imply that Islam is a fundamentally regressive religion. This narrative, however, is deeply flawed and runs contrary to the best historical evidence.

The Standard Narrative

Imam Al-Ghazali

This standard theory states that the first approximately 500 years of Islam were the golden age.  In this period Greek science and philosophy was actively translated and studied in the Muslim world.  This resulted in a spectacular flourishing of Islamic civilization.  The great works of Ibn Sina in Medicine and Philosophy, Ibn Haytham in Optics, Al-Khawarzmi in Mathematics and Al-Biruni in Biology were written.    Soon thereafter, Islamic theologians reasserted the primacy of revelation over reason and a sharp decline in the intellectual output of the Muslim world occurred.

The theory of Islamic decline has been so dominant and well accepted that the only question which is asked is “what caused the decline?”  Many reasons are given, several of which are chronicled in popular books like What went wrong?  By Bernard Lewis.  The most popular reason cited is the rise of “conservative religious forces”  which led to a “narrow, rigid and closed”  interpretation of Islam and actively hindered the growth of science.   The chief culprit they identify is the influential Islamic theologian Abu Hamid Al-Ghazali (d. 1111 CE).  One of the most influential and often-quoted Orientalist scholars E. C. Sachau writes:

The fourth [tenth] century is the turning point in the history of the spirit of Islam… But for Al-Ashari and Al-Ghazali the Arabs might have been a nation of Galileos, Keplers, and Newtons.

Numerous scholars , perhaps owing to this early Orientalist literature, have adopted a similar view ranging from the historian Toby Huff to the famous scientist Pervez Hoodbhoy .   This sentiment has translated into the standard history of science.  Thus we see the Nobel-prize winning scientist Steven Weinberg writing,

Alas, Islam turned against science in the twelfth century. The most influential figure was the philosopher Abu Hamid al-Ghazzali…. After al-Ghazzali, there was no more science worth mentioning in Islamic countries.

Perhaps it is only natural for Ghazali to be singled out for critique due to his stature within Islamic intellectual history.  Richard Frank describes his role as:

Al-Ghazali dominates the history of Muslim thought, and even though so categorical an assertion may be subject to qualification, there is no denying that he was the most important sunni theologian at a crucial turning point in the history of orthodox Muslim theology.  

Although this article will deal primarily with Islamic science, Ghazali is also held responsible for the presumed “closure of the gates of ijtihad” which supposedly occurred around the same time . Furthermore, he is felt to have dealt a fatal blow to the field of Islamic philosophy.   

This view has been conveniently adopted by right-wing ‘scholars’ who are happy to point out the intrinsic problems with Islam as a religion and its supposed inability to cope with science, complexity and modernity.  This can be seen in the attitude of Steven Weinberg himself who goes on to blame modern day terrorism on this supposed development.   The atheist and Islam-critic Richard Dawkins also subscribes to a similar view.  Populist works such as The Closing of the Muslim Mind: How Intellectual Suicide created the modern Islamist crisis by Robert R. Reilly published as recently as 2010 continue to propagate this myth.  In it Reilly writes,

Were it not for al-Ghazali, Averroes and rationalism might have won the battle for the Muslim mind.  But it did not happen, and, as a result, the Sunni Muslim mind suffered the consequences. It closed.

Bias and Ignorance

This normative view of Islamic history has, however, been seriously challenged recently due to a reexamination of the historical literature.   This renewed study of Islamic intellectual history suggests instead of a decline, a brilliant renaissance of intellectual and scientific thought took place in Islam after Ghazali.

The theory of decline was largely a byproduct of Orientalist literature.  Their interests lie not in a genuine study of Islamic civilization, but a focus on its role in the subsequent rise of western civilization.    Professor Berggren identifies the problem when he writes that the “treatment of medieval Islam as a civilization deserving of attention only for its role as a channel through which the great works of the Greeks were carried safely to the eager minds of the European Renaissance” results in “selective and tendentious reading of medieval Arabic texts to show how Islamic science prefigured that of modern times.” 

The assumption that Greek science was the impetus behind rise of Islamic science has also been recently seriously questioned.  The beginnings of Islamic science predated the translation movement.  For example, George Saliba points out that it would be impossible to translate Greek scientific texts unless a highly sophisticated scientific vocabulary already existed in Arabic, implying a preexisting robust scientific tradition.   Evidence also points to the fact that Islam’s engagement with Greek thought was always a critical one, not a passive and accepting one.   This is true even when we look at the so called “neo-platonic” thinkers such as Ibn Sina who was highly critical of Aristotle, openly rejecting many of his ideas.  

In fact, this moving away from the Greek tradition, “de-hellinization” within Islam as the sciences become more and more “Islamic” is seen by many as a move against reason .  However, here again this is largely based upon the assumption that “Islamic” implies anti-reason, and not on any empirical evidence.  The evidence on the contrary suggests a rich tradition of Islamic science developing within the context of a rational Islamic theology.

Much of the published research into Islamic science exists from the period prior to the scientific revolution in the West since this was naturally of most interest to western scholars.  This attitude has resulted in a sharp drop off in the amount of academic research into the later Islamic period.  Therefore, until recently we knew very little about what happened to Islamic science after the supposed decline took place.  In a lecture delivered at MIT, Syed Hossein Nasr emphasizes the same point when he writes,

There are over three thousand manuscripts of medicine in India which have never been studied by anybody. This is [only] the tip of the iceberg. There are thousands of manuscripts in Yemen which we don’t even know about.

Professor Dimitri Gutas points out that the patronage of science and the resulting scientific works in the later Ottoman period have been “almost completely unresearched.”   The respected historian of Islamic science, Muzaffar Iqbal writes:

So far we know of at-least 1000 scientists who worked between the eighth and eighteenth centuries; there are thousand more about whom we have no information or whom we merely know the names and their works’ titles.  There are over 200,000 manuscripts in Iran alone, of -which about three-quarters are as yet uncatalogued.

What Decline?

As this research is being conducted a new view of Islamic intellectual history is developing.  Evidence points to continued vibrancy and rigorous scientific activity flourishing for centuries after Ghazali.  Recently, Professor Ekmeleddi Ihsanoglu has documented that significant scientific activity continued in the Ottoman Empire well into the eighteenth century.  Professor Jamil Ragep at McGill has documented the accomplishments of Muslim scientists in the later period including hundreds of students engaged in creative theoretical and practical science at the great observatories at Maragha and later in Samarqand.  He writes,

During the past half century or so, an ever-increasing body of scholarly work has shown that science in Islam not only continued after al-Ghazali but in fact flourished for centuries thereafter.  Over the next five centuries or so, one can document the production of thousands of scientific and philosophical texts in both the eastern and western Islamic world that are attested by tens of thousands of extant manuscripts.

Many important discoveries occurred in this later period such as:  “discovery of the pulmonary transit (of blood from the heart to the lungs and back), precise determinations (up to fifteen decimal places) for Π and sin 1º, and map-projection techniques of remarkable accuracy and sophistication.”   He points out that recently the quasi-crystalline Penrose pattern has been discovered in the architecture in Isfahan centuries before it was described by Penrose in 1975.   He writes, “Given that less than 5% of the available material has been studied, it would seem that future research will bring to light many other discoveries.”  Much of the works recently studied relate to Astronomy.   Professor Lindberg in his Beginnings of Western Science writes,

Current archival research in the history of Islamic astronomy reveals decisively that at least this specific discipline flourished well into the sixteenth century—producing a continuous flow of knowledgeable, sometimes brilliant, astronomers, scatters throughout greater Islam.  As for the other sciences thousands of Arabic, Persian and Turkish manuscripts remain in libraries from Europe to the Middle East, unexamined.  What they may contain we have no way of knowing until we look.  

Echoing the same findings Abdelhamid Sabra (Emeritus professor of Arabic science at Harvard) and Hogendijk extends the period of growth into the nineteenth century.  They write,

The Islamic tradition in the exact sciences continued well into the nineteenth century, and abundant source material is available in the form of unpublished manuscripts in Arabic, Persian, and other languages in libraries all over the world.”

Yale professor George Saliba terms the post-Ghazali period the real golden age of Islam.  He describes the brilliant scientific production in this period as nothing short of a renaissance. This leads Saliba to ask if Ghazali was responsible for the decline of science, then how does one explain the:

Production of tens of scientists in every discipline, who continued to produce scientific texts that were in many ways superior to the texts that were before the time of Ghazali.  In the case of astronomy, one cannot even compare the sophistication of the post-Ghazali texts with the pre-Ghazali ones, for the former were in fact far superior both in theoretical mathematical sophistication, as well as in blending observational astronomy with theoretical astronomy.  

Although it is beyond the scope of this article, it is worth pointing out that similar progress after Ghazali can been seen in other fields.  For example, with regards to Islamic law professor Wael Hallaq writes,

It is our common, but rather inaccurate, belief that during the first three centuries of Islam, the highest and final stage of legal thought had been reached.  It may be astonishing, therefore, to realize that the sophistication of technical legal thought was in fact achieved after these centuries…

Professor Saliba points out those Orientalist scholars could not see the originality in the post-Ghazali books, even though they read them carefully, simply because they were not looking for any such originality.  The phenomenon is best seen in the context of the commentary literature, which is often construed as redundant learning, lacking in originality.  In reality, Saliba argues, commentaries served a purpose similar to modern-day periodicals advancing knowledge in their respective fields and were in some ways superior to them, requiring a synthesis of all prior knowledge. 

Contrary to the early Orientalist literature instead of demolishing science, Ghazali’s theology actually secured a place for science within an Islamic framework.  The metaphysical basis for this requires a separate article.  Suffice it to point out that neither Ghazali’s denial of necessary causality, nor his support of Ashari theology in anyway undermined prospects for rational inquiry within the Islamic context.  In fact, these positions actually stimulated scientific activity.   Ahmad Dallal summarizes its consequences when he writes,

After Al-Ghazali, the need to invoke religion to vindicate science considerably decreased, not because science was not accepted but because it did not need vindication.

Unlike in Europe where scientists were often persecuted by the Church , Islamic theologians actually created an environment which allowed science to flourish.  This is not to say that there were never any religious objections to science in Islam, indeed there were occasionally.   However, as professor Gutas points out these were relatively isolated incidents, the exception and not the rule.

If Muslims were so advanced, then one may ask, why then were the Europeans able to colonize and dominate the Muslim world?  Historians such as Ahmad Dallal argue this was largely due to an economic imbalance created by Europe’s discovery of the resource rich New World combined with emerging capitalism and the strategic deployment of new technologies.  The willingness of the Europeans to use these powerful technologies for the unprecedented exploitation of human and natural resources also played a role.  This late decline was not necessarily due to a structural or intellectual deficiency within the Islamic world.   In other words, traditional Islamic civilization’s ultimate demise late in the 19th century was largely due to factors extrinsic, not intrinsic, to its intellectual fabric.

Conclusion

Historical research now underway exposes the biases of the very influential early Orientalist scholarship on Islamic history and completely undermines the arguments of right-wing Islamophobic “scholars,” who would like to insist that something inherent about Islam’s theology resulted in its own demise.  Professor Lindberg summarizes the issue as follows:

The truth is that the image of decline in the twelfth to fifteenth centuries is not the product of research in manuscript archives, but an assumption made in the absence of research and encouraged for its usefulness as a tool in religious polemics over the relative merits of Islam and Christianity: which religious culture wins the natural sciences sweepstakes?”

Much research still needs to be done in to Islam’s rich scientific and intellectual heritage which clearly flourished well beyond its supposed golden age.  The research needs to be historicized and done in an objective manner keeping in mind Islam’s own worldview.  It is premature, even absurd, to ask, let alone answer, questions such as “what caused the Islamic decline?”   A false question propagated by those with little genuine interest in Islamic history.  Professor Nasr writes, “Muslims have not yet developed their own historiography of science.”     As this develops, many of our assumptions regarding the history of Islam might be overturned.  This may lead Muslims to seek to revive elements of its intellectual heritage.  Indeed, we might more rightfully ask, “what was it about Islamic civilization that caused science, philosophy, medicine, and law to flourish in its lands for well over 1000 years?”

Visit www.muslimphilosophy.com/aftab for a complete annotated version of this article.

15-51

By Karin Friedemann, TMO

Heben Nigatu wrote an article on Buzzfeed this week entitled “21 Microaggressions You Hear On a Daily Basis,” based on a photo series taken by photographer Kiyun, who asked minority students at Fordham University’s Lincoln Center campus to “write down an instance of racial microaggression they have faced.” She uses the term “microaggression” to refer to “brief and commonplace daily verbal, behavioral, or environmental indignities, whether intentional or unintentional, that communicate hostile, derogatory, or negative racial slights and insults toward people of color.”

An Asian American is frequently asked, “No, where are you REALLY from?”

A biracial student is bothered by the question, “What ARE you?”

Another biracial student is often asked, “You don’t speak Spanish?”

Microaggressions are not usually intended as personal attacks but clumsy attempts at conversation, frequently demonstrating the speaker’s desire to learn more about another.

“Often, they are never meant to hurt – acts done with little conscious awareness of their meanings and effects. Instead, their slow accumulation during a childhood and over a lifetime is in part what defines a marginalized experience, making explanation and communication with someone who does not share this identity particularly difficult. Social others are microaggressed hourly, daily, weekly, monthly.”

It’s an interesting discussion especially in light of the multiculturalism of the American Muslim community. Even though Muslims like to pray side by side with people of every color, it cannot be denied that pretty much every one of them will ask me where I’m from right after they ask my name, at any given mosque in America. If I say I’m from Michigan, they will invariably say, “But where are you REALLY from?” If I say my family is Swiss and German, they will say, “Oh, so you are WHITE.” Even if tell them my parents were immigrants, they will often insist I’m a White. The people talking to me like this are often American born themselves. So how come they get to be Egyptian or Pakistani while I am reduced to a skin tone? It is constantly draining to be around people who just do not understand where you are coming from, or what you feel you are.

Columbia University psychologist Derald Wing Sue who studied microaggressions against people of color in a white majority environment writes, “The result is confusion, anger and an overall sapping of energy.”

Years after Jena converted to Islam and married, she was surprised to learn that her husband had no idea that she was different than other white women. “It never occurred to him that I had unique personal characteristics and my own individual approach to life, based on where I come from, my social class, my cultural background and my personal experiences. My values often differ vastly from another person of similar skin tone, including other Muslims.”

It is amazing how very different most American converts to Islam are from each other, often converting to Islam for completely different reasons and possessing a wide variety approaches to understanding scripture and practice.

In America, there is ongoing conflict between people who want to be appreciated for what they are including their ethnicity, and those who want to ignore cultural differences. This was highlighted in the Fordham university photo series with a couple examples:

A black university student complains of being told, “You don’t act like a normal black person.” It makes him uncomfortable to openly discuss racial differences.

Meanwhile, another black student feels offended when told, “I never see you as a black girl.” It makes her uncomfortable that someone wanted to overlook her race.

Another student states: “The limited representation of my race in your classroom does not make me the voice of all Black People.”

I think many Muslims can relate to that one – especially those who wear hijab are constantly being treated as the voice of all Muslim people, who exist to bear the brunt of misconceptions and patiently explain Islam to the ignorant. It can be tiring.

“These incidents may appear small, banal and trivial, but we’re beginning to find they assail the mental health of recipients,” Sue says.

Whenever most people are faced with someone who does not understand us, it makes us uncomfortable that we have to explain and even justify things we already take for granted, especially if we fear judgment in their discussion of our culture. It also truly hurts when we try to ask friends about their own political and cultural beliefs and practices, after they have assailed us with their own prejudiced assumptions about our thinking, and they get all defensive and indignant that they should have to explain themselves to us.

On the bright side, the mere existence of such awkward conversations means that integration is happening. People are trying to include people of other cultures in their everyday conversations. In a different decade, people who were different might live in totally secluded communities where they never had to confront anyone who doesn’t share their world view. In the past, far fewer people went out of their way to talk to people different from themselves. Those who tried to mix would be more often ridiculed or threatened than just asked weird questions.

Personally I feel more comfortable with open conversation that discusses racial background groupings, which gives people the room to fix any misconceptions, rather than politically correct colorblindness, which tends to promote the idea that skin color doesn’t matter as long as we all think and act according to ruling class social assumptions.

While it’s clear that microaggressions have negative affects, Kenneth R. Thomas, PhD, of the University of Wisconsin–Madison maintains that teaching people to look for insult in ambiguous language or warning people to be very very careful about mentioning ethnic background can also backfire, as it “would restrict rather than promote candid interaction between members of different racial groups.”

Kenneth Sole, PhD, whose consulting firm Sole & Associates Inc. trains employees on team communication, works with clients on ways to frame discriminatory incidents so they feel empowered rather than victimized.

15-51

By Amy Sawitta Lefevre

Ethnic Rohingya refugees from Myanmar wave as they are transported by a wooden boat to a temporary shelter in Krueng Raya in Aceh Besar, in this file picture taken April 8, 2013. REUTERS/Junaidi Hanafiah/Files

BANGKOK (Reuters) – Thailand will help the United Nations and the United States with any investigation into the findings of a Reuters report that Thai immigration officials moved Myanmar refugees into human-trafficking rings, the prime minister said on Saturday.

The United Nations and the United States called on Friday for an investigation into the report, published on Thursday and based on a two-month investigation in three countries, that revealed a clandestine policy to remove Rohingya refugees from Thai immigration detention centers and deliver them to human traffickers waiting at sea.

Thai Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra, who chairs a government committee on human trafficking, declined to comment on the findings when asked about her reaction.

“I cannot comment on the Rohingya issue and reaction as this is the responsibility of the Foreign Ministryto handle,” she said in a comment to Reuters, delivered through an aide.

“The ministry will liaise with the United States and the U.N. to help with any investigation they need.”

The Rohingya are stateless Muslims from Myanmar, also known as Burma. Clashes between Rohingya and ethnic Rakhine Buddhists exploded in Myanmar last year, making 140,000 people homeless, most of them Rohingya.

Since then, tens of thousands of Rohingya have fled from Myanmar by boat and many arrive off southwest Thailand.

After being delivered to human traffickers at sea, the Rohingya are transported across southern Thailand and held hostage in camps hidden near the border with Malaysia until relatives pay ransoms to release them, according to the Reuters report. Some are beaten and some are killed.

“These allegations need to be investigated urgently,” U.N. refugee agency spokeswoman Vivian Tan said in a statement.
The United States issued a similar call hours later.

“We are aware of reports alleging that Thai officials have been involved in selling Rohingya migrants to human traffickers,” U.S. State Department spokeswoman Marie Harf said. “We urge the Thai governmentto conduct a serious and transparent investigation into the matter.”

SANCTIONS RISK

Major General Chatchawal of the Royal Thai Police was quoted in the Reuters report as saying that there was an unofficial policy to deport the Rohingya to Myanmar.

He called this “a natural way or option two”. But he said the Rohingya signed statements in which they agree they want to return to Myanmar.

These statements, however, were at times produced in the absence of a Rohingya-language translator, Reuters found.

New York-based watchdog group Human Rights Watch criticized Thailand for moving detainees into established smuggling and trafficking rings, and warned Thailand could face a possible downgrade in a U.S. list of the world’s worst enforcers of human-trafficking laws.

Such a downgrade would place Thailand, a close U.S. ally and Southeast Asia’s second-biggest economy, at risk of U.S. sanctions and put it on par with North Korea and Iran among the worst performers in fighting human trafficking.

The U.S. State Department is gathering information for its next Trafficking In Persons (TIP) report, due in June. Thailand faces an automatic downgrade to Tier 3, the lowest rank, unless it makes “significant efforts” to improve its record in combating trafficking, the State Department says. The Tier 3 designation could leave Thailand subject to U.S. sanctions.

Sek Wannamethee, a spokesman for Thailand’s Foreign Ministry, said earlier that the Rohingya issue was one of several the United States would take into consideration before deciding on Thailand’s grade.

Nine people have been arrested in Thailand in relation to Rohingya smuggling in 2013, including two government officials, according to police data. None of the arrests has led to convictions.

Thailand prosecuted 27 people for trafficking in 2012, down from 67 the previous year, according to the 2013 TIP Report by the U.S. State Department.

15-51

Incandescent lamps are often considered the least energy efficient type of electric lighting commonly found in residential buildings. Although inefficient, incandescent lamps possess a number of key advantages–they are inexpensive to buy, turn on instantly, are available in a huge array of sizes and shapes and provide a pleasant, warm light with excellent color rendition.
However, because of their relative inefficiency and short life spans, they are more expensive to operate than newer lighting types such as compact fluorescent lamps (CFLs) and light-emitting diodes (LEDs).
Types of Incandescent Lamps
There are three common types of incandescent lamps (called A-line lamps) used in residential applications:
•    Standard incandescent or pear-shaped A-19 lamps
•    Energy-saving or halogen A-19 lamps
•    Reflector or parabolic reflector (PAR) lamps, sometimes called “flood” or “spot” lamps
Standard Incandescent A-Line Lamps
Commonly known as the screw-in “A”-type lamp that use a medium Edison (E-26) base, standard incandescent bulbs are the least efficient light source commonly found in homes. These lamps produce visible light by heating a tiny coil or filament of tungsten wire that glows when it is heated by an electrical current.
“Long-life” lamps are an example of lamps with thicker, stronger filaments that can last much longer than a standard service lamp, but they are less energy efficient.
New efficiency standards for lighting require lamps to use about 25% less energy. These standards began taking effect starting in January 2012 and the phase-in will be complete as of January 1, 2014, after which time traditional incandescent general service lamps such as the common A-19 will not be available in most stores. Learn more about the new lighting standards.
Energy-Saving Incandescent (or Halogen) Lightbulbs
A halogen lamp is a type of incandescent lamp with a capsule that holds a special halogen gas composition around the heated filament to increase the efficacy of the incandescence. They are more energy efficient than standard incandescent bulbs but somewhat more costly. Halogen lamps may also have a special inner coating that reflects heat back into the capsule to further improve efficacy by “recycling” the otherwise wasted heat. Together, the filling and coating recycle heat to keep the filament hot with less electricity. They also provide excellent color rendition.

Halogens are a little more expensive than standard incandescent lamps, but are less expensive to operate because of their higher efficacy and longer life expectancy. They are commonly used in reflector lamps such as indoor and outdoor flood or spot lighting, indoor recessed and track fixtures, and floor and desk lamps.
Some halogen bulbs are dimmable, as indicated on the package, and are compatible with timers and other lighting controls.
Reflector Lamps
Reflector bulbs (Type R) spread and direct light over specific areas. They are used mainly for floodlighting, spotlighting, and down lighting applications both indoor and outdoor.
There are two types of reflector lamps:
•    Parabolic aluminized reflector lamps (Type PAR) are used for a number of applications, including outdoor floodlighting.
•    Ellipsoidal reflector lamps (Type ER) focus light beams about 2 inches in front of its enclosure, projecting light down from recessed fixtures. Ellipsoidal reflectors are twice as energy efficient as parabolic reflectors for recessed fixtures.
The first incandescent electric light was made in 1800 by Humphry Davy, an English scientist. He experimented with electricity and invented an electric battery. When he connected wires to his battery and a piece of carbon, the carbon glowed, producing light. This is called an electric arc.
Much later, in 1860, the English physicist Sir Joseph Wilson Swan (1828-1914) was determined to devise a practical, long-lasting electric light. He found that a carbon paper filament worked well, but burned up quickly. In 1878, he demonstrated his new electric lamps in Newcastle, England.
The inventor Thomas Alva Edison (in the USA) experimented with thousands of different filaments to find just the right materials to glow well and be long-lasting. In 1879, Edison discovered that a carbon filament in an oxygen-free bulb glowed but did not burn up for 40 hours. Edison eventually produced a bulb that could glow for over 1500 hours.
Lewis Howard Latimer (1848-1928) improved the light bulb by inventing a carbon filament (patented in 1881); Latimer was a member of Edison’s research team, which was called “Edison’s Pioneers.” In 1882, Latimer developed and patented a method of manufacturing his carbon filaments.
In 1903, Willis R. Whitney invented a treatment for the filament so that it wouldn’t darken the inside of the bulb as it glowed. In 1910, William David Coolidge (1873-1975) invented a tungsten filament which lasted even longer than the older filaments. The incandescent bulb revolutionized the world.

15-50

Zakiyah Ansari, Imam Khalid Latif appointed to De Blasio transition team

New York Mayor-Elect Bill de Blasio recently announced the appointment of 60 experienced leaders and experts to his transition committee that will assist him in building a progressive, competent and diverse city government.

“These leaders are volunteering their expertise in every issue and area of municipal affairs,” said Mayor-Elect de Blasio. “Together, they will join Transition NYC Co-Chairs Carl Weisbrod and Jennifer Jones Austin in helping me to assemble a team that’s devoted to building one great city where everyone shares in our prosperity.”

Among the sixty is education advocated Zakiyyah Ansari and Imam Khalid Latif.

Zakiyah Ansari is the Advocacy Director at Alliance for Quality Education. A mother of eight, Ansari has seen six of her children graduate from New York City public schools and go on to college, with two currently enrolled in city schools.

Imam Khalid Latif was appointed the first Muslim chaplain at NYU in 2005 where he began to initiate his vision for a pluralistic future on and off campus for American Muslims. He was also appointed the first Muslim chaplain at Princeton University in 2006. Spending a year commuting between these two excellent institutions, he finally decided to commit full-time to New York University’s Islamic Center where his position was officially institutionalized in the spring of 2007. Under his leadership, the Islamic Center at NYU became the first ever established Muslim student center at an institution of higher education in the United States. Imam Latif’s exceptional dedication and ability to cross interfaith and cultural lines on a daily basis brought him recognition throughout the city, so much so that in 2007 Mayor Michael Bloomberg nominated Imam Latif to become the youngest chaplain in history of the New York City Police Department at the age of 24.

Dr. Abdul Rehman is the recipient of  Louis R. Miller Business Leadership Award

The Louis R. Miller Leadership Awards Breakfast is a special, prestigious event highlighting the accomplishments of outstanding small business owners and not-for-profit organization executives on Staten Island.  Dr. Abdul Rehman, a physician who has practiced for forty years, has been named as the recipient of the award this year. The award will be given at the Staten Island Chamber of Commerce’s annual meeting in February.

Dr. Abdul Rehman has be actively voluntering in a number of humanitarian and charitable activities.

After the 2005 Pakistan earthquake, Dr. Rehman — who also serves as the director of religious affairs and chairman of the founding committee for the Masjid Al-Noor Mosque in Concord — worked to raise funds for victims.

Dr. Rehman this year received the Best Doctor Award and The Humanitarian Award both by the Medical Society of the County of Kings.

Interfaith meeting held in South Brunswick

SOUTH BRUNSWICK,NJ–An interfaith luncheon in South Brunswick was attended by around 200 people of different faiths.

”This is an opportunity for the sharing of stories to replace fear and misconceptions,”  said Dr. Mazoor Hussain, coordinator of interfaith affairs for the Cranbury Institute of Islamic Studies, to the South Brunswick Post.

The afternoon luncheon, the ninth such annual gathering sponsored by the institute, included a panel of three members of the Christian clergy, the Rev. Bill Walker, the Rev. John Morrison, the Rev. Cornell Edmonds, Rabbi Eric Wisnia of the Congregation Beth Chaim temple in Princeton Junction and Sohaib Sultan, Princeton University’s first Muslim chaplain.

Muslims and Jews call for immigration reform

American Jews and American Muslims called on Congress in a joint statement to pass comprehensive immigration reform with a meaningful path to citizenship. In joining together as unlikely allies, Bend the Arc: A Jewish Partnership for Justice and the Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC) renewed their united push to refocus Congress’ attention on the nation’s most pressing domestic policy crisis.

The following is a joint statement from Alan van Capelle, CEO of Bend the Arc: A Jewish Partnership for Justice and Haris Tarin, director of the Washington, D.C., office of the Muslim Public Affairs Council:

“In combining our voices, we hope Congress hears that immigration reform is a priority issue across America’s many diverse communities, bringing together even those that many believe have little in common. In fact, America’s Jewish and Muslim communities share the collective experience of facing xenophobia and prejudice for their culture and faith, and being treated as outsiders in our home country.

Comprehensive immigration reform has long been a priority issue for both our communities, as many of our families share stories of immigrating to the U.S. Both of our communities have deep roots here. But both of our communities also know firsthand the struggle to find acceptance in our adopted homeland.

Eleven million people in this country contribute to our economy and strengthen the fabric of our communities, but are living without the basic civil rights and protections that the rest of us enjoy. This fundamental injustice cuts against the core values as a nation, as people of faith, and is especially compelling to the Muslim and Jewish communities who value America’s enduring history as a welcoming and compassionate nation.

Our coming together today to call on Congress to pass comprehensive immigration reform is, in itself, a testament to the great potential of an America with a just and inclusive immigration system. In other parts of the world, sadly, such a collaboration would be all but impossible. America’s strength is derived from its ability to draw the best and the brightest from all walks of life, including all and excluding none.

We urge you to come together, as we have, to pass comprehensive immigration reform with a path to citizenship, and keep America strong.”

Both Bend the Arc and the Muslim Public Affairs Council have been active in advocating for comprehensive immigration reform with a path to citizenship, citing shared values of treating others with dignity and respect, and the importance of keeping families together.

15-50