What is Islamization of Science?

Gill - thanks.

Knowledge has no religion.

Just as Ghalib had said that `Laddo` or `Burfi` are not hindu or muslim when some one objected to his eating `Laddos` which had come from a hindu family.

nhk

There is nothing called ``Islamic Science`` or ``Hindu Science``. I am sure they are Arab contributions to Mathematics and Science. I doubt their work was in any way influenced by Quran. In any case the contributions of ancient Arabs is dwarfed by the amount of knowledge generated in the past century.

It is unclear what exactly do you mean by Islamization of Islam. What is your understanding of this concept? I have read a few of Syed Hossein Nasr`s books and I was left with the impression that when he talked about Islam and Science, he was referring to the contributions Muslims scientists have made to the general body of science whether it be Medicine, Astronomy, Biology, Botany, Physics, Chemistry or Mathematics. Now if you claim that the Canon of Avicenna was used in European universities for seven hundred years and is the basis of modern medicine, would that mean that Medicine is being Islamicized? You claim Professor Nasr`s discourses on this subject were foggy and philosophically enigmatic. I, on the other hand found his explanations succinct and easily comprehensible. Would you please give an example from any of his works regarding the Islamization of science that presents this subject as unclear. You claim that science, atleast Physical Science is totally diferent from Islam. What do you mean by such a statement? Let us consider the physical sciences such as Chemistry and Physics, so how do they exist outside the scope of Islam. As far as I can tell, the sciences are inside the fold of Islam.
I was extremely fortunate to have Dr. Anthony M. Alioto as a teacher of history, whose book “ A History of Western Science” is a brilliant scholarly work taught at many American universities.
“ Their ( The Muslims) obsession was not to understand the cosmic garden for itself, but rather to find within its workings evidence of the divine gardener.`` [120]

“.Like the Christian, the Muslim accepts the reality of the transcendental world, yet unlike Scripture, the Koran makes no pretense at a cosmological system. When stories are related, even those from the Judeo-Christian tradition, they are meant to emphasize the power of Allah and the fearful price of refusing to submit. Therefore, the science of the visible world is, on the whole, unencumbered by revelation. In fact, the faithful are commanded by Allah to study nature, for nature is His metaphor. Reason could, of course, run afoul of religion, and Islam did have its Tertullians. But the command to study nature and the underlying concept of its unicity reflecting the oneness of God stimulated a keen interest among Muslims in science. (115)

“Note the religious assumption behind Islamic science: ``There is a natural hierarchy of knowledge from the physics of matter to the metaphysics of cosmological speculation, yet all knowledge terminates in the Divine. All phenomena are creations of Allah, His theophanies, and nature is a vast unity to be studied by believers as the visible sign of the Godhead. Nature is like an oasis in the bleak solitude of the desert; the tiny blades of grass as well as the most magnificent flowers bespeak of the gardener`s loving hand. All nature is such a garden, the cosmic garden of God. Its study is a sacred act.`` (114f.)

Mr. Gill, I strongly agree with Talha. I urge you to read some of Professor Nasr`s books and if you have read them, then please quote specifics. I am sure you would find Dr. Anthony M. Alioto`s, “ A History of Western Science” a fascinating read. Perhaps reading Dr. Nasr and Dr. Alioto would clarify the very questions you raise in your article.

God is Truth.

Mr. Gill,

A very accountable effort towards a topic which had been a source of contradictions and controvercies in all sects of Muslims. But I am really amazed to read your research.
People believe that Islam is a religion and Science is a progress and Islam is rigid code of life leaving all of its roots and propagation in ethics in very conservative manner. And development in thought process has been stagnant in its believers. However its true when we see that West without concentrating to ` Label of Religion ` has worked for the benefit of mankind. And this puts questions in our minds that why not muslims induldge in care of even the basic human rights. Sir Alexander Fleming discovered Pencillin and saved thousands of lives but till his last times was a humble person saying that any mould from a housewife`s kitchen flew to my laboratory and made by discovery.
We Muslims, stress too much on our identity and ``Haqooq ul Allah`` in general, however ``Haqool ul Ibaad`` in our religious are more rewarding in Allah`s court. What stops us from Growing, organizing , liberation and development are our own prejudices. We have made our lifestyles in such manner that hinder our developments.
Just look around in Pakistan, people are overloaded in transports with pathetic means to travel. Women are in worse situation. We are an agriculture currency and we could make a vertical growth in this field but we don`t put forward ``Land Reforms`` for benefit of farmers and to produce more products. But our Jagerdaars and Politicians need Latest Models of Honda Civic, Toyota Corrolla. There is no atmosphere for a person to feel free. The Labour in Pakistan is such degrading circumstances that its really to cry on their plights. Science is to make efforts to make livings better for a common man in development stages. Then when common man takes part in progress of a country then the horizons become broader and necessities come to become more customized and you come in a cycle of inventions and research in ares critical in those times fullfilling needs making needs selling them and making other feel them.
Religion never stops us to teach our daughters higher education and work in R&D organizations.
Science needs a platform to grow. And this platform is built by common people who enjoy fruit of their labour. The scientists are working day and night they are not in search of God but they are utilizing their brains which teases them to work in multidimensions and one day they will discover the God. Then the religion will be decided.

``Conclusion

The methodology for Islamizing science as postulated by various Muslim scholars is not clear. Their discourse is muddled and inaccurate. These proposals are at best a theological discourse having no relation to the hard sciences. At their worst, they are the result of confused and emotional but ambitious wishes and desires. At best, they fantasize a utopian adventure leading nowhere. ````

Agreed. But the issue of Islamization is about a political theology trying to subdue the freedom of the individual scientists to think new hypothesis which contradict the theological basis of these theocratic political movements...............the issue is about intellectual freedom and why no political theology should enter our academic institutions.................

Mr Gill,

It seems like you have not understood Seyyed Hossein Nasr`s ideas. He does not talk about Islamizing Science in the way you have understood it to be. And before i move any further, I would like to inform you that Seyyed Hossein Nasr is not only a philospher by education. He went to MIT and completed his undergrad in Physics.

He talks about the purpose of science in Islam. How Ibn Sina, Ibn Jabr etc viewed their research. For what purpose they conducted it. And what their mind set was. He is simply stating that we have lost that connection. Modern day science does not have that same foundation and philosophy. Today we will spend millions to research how to pollute our land, we will build and develop without thinking about the consequences of our research and action. And before i conclude, Ibn Sina and his like always had the concept of a Divine creator whose works they studied and pondered upon.

I looked at your refrences and there is not one book! of Seyyed Hossein Nasrs that you referred to. And here you are trying to analyze his works. You actually used Leif Stenberg`s understanding to build your argument. Please read Dr Nasr`s works itself to know the man and his ideas.
Peace!

Mr. Gill,

First, and most important, the concept of Islamization of Knowledge, of which Islamization of Science is an offshoot, is a concept in it`s inception. It is also a concept that has little attention in the Muslim world or among Muslim academics. So really, let`s not blow this out of proportion, or be impetuous in our judgment on something that is clearly in the `brainstorming` phase.

You are correct, no hard-set ideas have come from the movement, and many still born ideas are clearly present in the current discourse. Your analysis, however, seems to jump the gun, commenting on the movement as if it claims to have solid ideas, ready for implementation.

I`m interested in some of the ideas from the movement, and currently that`s all it claims to provide...a set of ideas to seed others. But like I said, there are few takers. Some of the ideas I actually consider positive are:

* Extending the concept of `scholar` or `ulema` to include scientists and have them participate in a larger Islamic discourse (hence the name- Islamic Science - this is critical to understand).
* Also extending core religious concepts, like Jihad in a pro-Science way (a bit of a stretch, but the notion of a martyr as one who dies in the pursuit of knowledge is admirable)
* The idea that in order for Science to take seed in the hearts and minds of Muslims, who are by far and wide traditional, that a superposition of traditional (and familiar) ideas onto the modern ones will help in endearing Science not only to the layperson, but especially to the Ulema who are thus far highly suspect of it. Here there is an implicit acknowledgement that there is a “western” character to science that needs to be altered to fit into Muslim societies. Again, not the core ideas or methodologies, but rather the containing culture. And I think there is a culture to science that is dissociated from the results that it produces…you can go on about the objectivity of science but the fact is sometimes the process of doing science is not exactly objective…there are principles of simplicity, economic concerns as to what is actually studied, consensus building, etc. that we deal with…there’s much more than empirical results, and even the empirical results are not conclusive.

Personally, I’m fine with “Islamization” so long as it’s done on the “light” (some go too far in their ideas of Islamization) and not tied to any political ideology. Similarly, I’m comfortable and interested in criticism of this movement, so long as it’s not done simply to preserve a perceived assault on the secular, or simply dismisses the movement as a front for some ideological movement (a claim some liberals make).

Mohamad Gill,
Excellent and thought provoking article. It is very refreshing to see a muslim(assumed,since you have a muslim name) start questioning Koran, Islam and the holy cow Mohamad. You have hit the nail bang on, in your analysis of the failure of Muslims and their lies about Koran being a ALL-KNOWING book of science, politics, moral guide and divine prophecy. I am simply amazed how such obvious book of BS like Koran has survived the 20th century. The only explnation is the muslim backwardness. I think by the end of this century Muslims will be more evolved. There is hope with more muslims like you coming out and taking on the Mullahs in their propaganda and lies.

Just and wait and see how many Pakistani muslims come out and call you as traitor to Islam. Rational thinking and critical analyzis is anathema to the muslims since that will de-mythify mohamad and bring him crashing down to what he really is, a megalomaniac delusional arab warrior. But the sooner Mohamad comes crashing down, the better, coz that will save many thousands of innocent lives killed by the Jihadis in the name of Koran and Mohamad.

Keep up the good work.