Why Islamic Civilization Must Be Re-Discovered Print E-mail
Sunday, 23 December 2007
274555_beyazit_mosque_istanbul.jpgYou could hardly call Islamic civilization "lost" - not in the sense of fabled Atlantis, for example -- but few people today know very much about it, or are even conscious of how many aspects of Western society owe their very existence to Islamic roots.

In some way, we all come in daily contact with microchips, space travel, medicine, physical sciences, mathematics, engineering, music, literature, arts, architecture, and spirituality. But do any of us - including contemporary Muslims themselves - fully realize how directly all of these advances and disciplines have been built upon more than a millennium of achievements by Muslim scientists, scholars, engineers and artists? Probably not.

It is high time for Islamic civilization to be rediscovered and celebrated by Muslims and non-Muslims alike, especially in the West. And it is equally important that we ignore all those who, for political reasons, have a longtime vested interest in dismissing or suppressing Islamic civilization, to the point where it has become scarcely known and not even a footnote on most school and university curricula.

The need to share and celebrate (before it is too late) the remarkable diversity, beauty and ingenuity of Islamic achievement is what motivated Canadian Muslims to declare October as Islamic History Month ( www.islamichistorymonth.com). It is a creative and unprecedented venture that deserves to be emulated by other Western countries.

As one who has long been fascinated by Islamic history and culture, I was delighted recently to encounter an excellent book that positively addresses the same issues being promoted across this country by Islamic History Month Canada.

It is Michael Hamilton Morgan’s Lost History; the Enduring Legacy of Muslim Scientists, Thinkers and Artists. It is published by the distinguished National Geographic Society and includes a foreword by King Abdullah II of Jordan.

Lost History has been read by other significant authors on contemporary political and cultural issues, such as former U.S. President Jimmy Carter, who said that Morgan’s book "delivers a missing link to the story of an interconnected world: the achievements of Muslim civilization and its influence on East and West." I wholeheartedly agree with Carter’s praise.

What makes this book so unique is that a post-9/11 American intellectual has dared to advocate for understanding the history of Islamic civilization and its many contributions. Being on the "side" of an entire culture targeted by association in the American-invented War on Terror is a risky business for any author. But Morgan pulled it off.

Why did he even bother to swim against the pro-Bush current in popular publishing? This is how Morgan’s own introduction answers the inevitable question:

"To lose the conscious memory of an entire civilization is especially tragic and dangerous, because each civilization, no matter how grand or flawed, is a laboratory of human ideas and ideals, of dreams and nightmares. We can learn from all of them ... By writing Lost History, I hope to show not only the contributions of an old and rich civilization. I hope to show, as Caliph al-Mamun concluded, that reason and faith can be the same, that by fully opening the mind and unleashing human creativity, many wonders -- including peace -- are possible."

While each chapter of Lost History focuses on a specific historical era, it opens with interesting dramatized "what-if" scenarios that challenge the reader to connect both past and present.

By writing this book, Morgan explains, "I am entering a potential minefield. The minefield is now given greater intensity by the current convergence of radical Islamist terrorism, the rise in ‘literalist’ fundamentalist religious models for organizing societies and individual lives, continuing battles between Israel and her neighbors, outbursts of anti-Semitism, the United States' invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq and its ‘war on terrorism,’ and political and economic crises in selected Muslim societies."

He continues: "Most Americans, including American Muslims, and even many Muslims from other parts of the world, know only the dimmest outlines of Muslim history, i.e., ‘they were great once, they invented arithmetic, but then they fell behind.’ Most Westerners have been taught that the greatness of the West has its intellectual roots in Greece and Rome, and that after the thousand-year-sleep of the Dark Ages, Europe miraculously reawakened to its Greco-Roman roots. In the conventional telling, this rediscovery of classical Greece -- combined with the moral underpinning of the Judeo- Christian faith -- led to the Renaissance and the Enlightenment, and the scientific and industrial revolutions. The intellectual contributions of Arabs, Persians, Indians, Chinese, Africans, and others in the Muslim world are relegated to mere footnotes."

And finally, he concludes, "... I hope that non-Muslims can gain greater respect and deeper understanding of their Muslim cousins than current headlines and policies would suggest and that today's Muslims can see how Islam was once applied in a way to support creativity, invention, tolerance, and diversity of thought and behavior in both society and in individual lives.

"Then ... maybe we can begin to understand the issues of today that will never be solved by force. Because if there is no other lesson to be drawn from Lost History, it is that force rarely [if] ever positively resolves issues of the spirit and the soul - whether in individuals or in civilizations."

I can only respond; Amen, Brother Michael, Amen!

(Dr. Mohamed Elmasry is national president of the Canadian Islamic Congress. He can be reached at np@canadianislamiccongress.com)



Digg!Reddit!Del.icio.us!Live!Facebook!Technorati!Spurl!Furl!Blogmarks!Yahoo!

Readers have left 5 comments.
Apples: Quote

Nonsense. Any so called 'knowledge' many Muslims believe 'Islam' cooked up to enlighten the world, was built upon foundations rooted elsewhere. Not in "Islam" as a faith itself. That's like saying Christianity sparked great geniuses from a faith. Nonsense. Individual minds achieve. Not faiths.

Christianity was pretty much the enemy of learning when we look at history. Much of the knowledge that Islamic empires believe "they" sparked, were achievements merely 'built upon' from existing knowledge by great men in Greece and Rome.

Islam as a faith was born in an illiterate peninsula of mostly desert,and only became a "civilization" per se when it encountered "civlization" that it took over, such as the Persians and Byzantines and absorbed massive wealth of knowledge from them and built upon that.

Persian knowledge was a mixture of influence from India and China too, and for the Byzantines the knowledge from the western Roman Empire and the Greeks. "Islam" 'itself' isn't responsible.

It is individual minds which are responsible for everything. Faith, has nothing to do with it. Whenever I hear people say that "Islam" did this and that in the past,I laugh. Because being a Muslim doesn't automatically make you a genius.

Neither does being a Jew or Christian or Buddhist or Jain or Atheist. Empires were built. Better connections were made. Trading took place, sharing of knowledge, building upon that knowledge, and the finances to do so are the result of most empires.

The fact that the roots you are speaking of happened to be an empire with Islam as its faith, doesn't mean "Islam" itself is the bringer of great wisdom. It is the wisdom of great men, no matter what faith (or lack of it). So quit with these attempts to say "you" (just so happening to be a Muslim) belong to something with a genius legacy.

Our civilizations have worked together well and knowledge has been shared. The only thing you are correct in saying, is that the west (I assume that specifically you really refer to northern europe) has 'built upon' certain aspects of knowledge that were expanded in the middle east. You neglect to mention that this knowledge was itself building upon foundations already set from elsewhere.

You do this as you wish to claim it as an "Islamic" achievement.
(1) 2007-12-23 20:25:46
Yakoub Islam: Quote

You also need to un-discover the myth of Europe as being the originator of contemporary globalization - the idea that it took Islamic stuff and created today's shrinking world, with it's distinct set of Western democratic liberal values. In fact, Europe was a latecomer to a process of globalization that was already well underway. Its distinction was to bring an extreme ruthlessness to the process, stamping on all of its competitors as it conquered them in an act of unprecedented international mass murder. See e.g. John Hobson's 'The Eastern Origins of Western Civilization' and also recent posts of the blog, 'The Cutting Edge'.
(2) 2007-12-24 08:07:51
azaad: Quote

Apples

You seem to have a completely dismissive attitude towards Islam. To you every 'civilisation' can be so-called except for 'Islamic' civilisation. So you accept Byzantine, Persian and every other ilk.

If you consider the Arabian peninsula to indeed have been illiterate then you have no option but to accept that the exquisite quality of Quraanic Arabic is nothing short of a miracle; even more so since it was recited by an illiterate man in an illiterate peninsula!

Brilliant minds in a barbaric land will be extinguished like candles in a storm. Such minds can only thrive if the environment in which they live in is 'civil'. Something must happen to civil-ise the barbarians. The infrastructure of the Islamic faith -- the Quraan and the Hadith had just such an effect on the chaotic and heathen environment. Truth is simple: lies are complex. Thus your beloved Byzantium, built on layers and layers of lies, literally, became so complex that even today we call the mind-boggling twists of any devious plotter as being 'Byzantine'. (You can also see the horrendously complex lie-structure of Hinduism and how it led to 'suttee' and the non-human caste system). Such complexity can also be discerned in the Catholic 'catechism', representing as it does century upon century of explaining one lie with another.

Incidentally, how is it that hugely complex India could not produce anything so beautiful as the Taj Mahal until the Muslims arrived? All Muslim-inspired/influenced Indian architecture/jewelery/art is considerably more elegant than the convoluted Hindu productions. There is something inherently ugly about the appearance of a Hindu temple; whereas look at any mosque in India and you will see both simplicity and elegance.

Islam attached a huge importance to the attainment of knowledge [of any kind that uncovered (i.e. 'dis'-covered) the works of God], including philosophy. It specifically taught that the planets, stars and other 'heavenly' bodies were there for man's service; thus was born the science of astro-'nomy', whereas your beloved 'civilisations' had hitherto called it astro-'logy' (where human beings are deemed to be at the mercy of the planets!). Adopting the Islamic perpective led to Arabs (Muslims) becoming the navigators of choice for the most prominent explorers for centuries.

You have to understand that prior to the Islamic era, so-called 'science' was in fact in the realm of 'magic', particularly where Chemistry was concerned. Muslims perfected Algebra, trigonometery, chemistry and astronomy; plus they made philosophy more scientific.

You will of course also note that in Europe, knowledge was only for the few: ordinary Christians wer not allowed to even read the Bible. The priests had a monopoly all the way up to the Gutenberg Bible. In Europe 'ignorance' was the default position; whereas in the Islamic world 'knowledge' was a requirement. The 'Renaissance' was the 'Islamisation' of the European intellect!

Of course each generation/civilisation has at its disposal certain 'building-blocks'; its what they do with them that determines whether they can be labelled 'great'.
(3) 2007-12-24 17:08:17
azaad: Quote

It seems that, like Apples (and many other commentators) your perspective can best be described as Islam-denying. That is, no matter what the actual historical evidence, you will not acknowledge any contribution uniquely made by a Muslim, or by Islam towards the evolution of Human civilisation.

You wax lyrical about the Mayans (Oh, and, purrleeeze, don't quote Wikepedia -- not if you consider yourself to be a serious commentator!). But do you not know that Mayan (and Aztec), so-called 'civilisations', used human sacrifice as a norm? If you think that 'human sacrifice' and 'civilisation' can go together, then your underdstanding of the latter isn't the same as mine. And, Mayan and Aztec art is indeed complex, colourful and perhaps apocalyptic, but it is not in any way 'beautiful' or 'elegant'. Genreally it is animist (with even human figures wearing animal masks/head-dresses), and rather repetetive. And as for their 'astronimical' recordings: these were akin to the ancient Egyptians', that is, calculations were for the timing of priestly rituals. There is no evidence whatsoever of an navigational usage of astronomical information. (The Aztecs sacrificed human beings at dusk each day, in order to ensure that the Sun was 'appeased' and would indeed rise the following day! -- so much for 'astronomy')

As for Mayan 'architechture' these were mainly monumental 'pyramid' structures, which are just sophisticated 'piles' of stone.

Had Arabs made advances before Islam? They used to bury alive female children, so little value for human life was there! So much for 'civilisation! All the Arab Muslim scientific/philosophic advances came about once Islam was properly established. If these had already occurred as you state, before Islam, then they would have been there at the very outset of Islam. There is absoloutely no evidence of it. Instead, it was a time of ignorance and infanticide. Take care not to be too eager to let your Islamaphobia make you celebrate uncivilised behaviour.

My point about the convoluted nature of the architecture of certain civilisations/cultures/religions is that the outward rendition reflects the inner architecture of the soul. As I said before complexity arises when layer upon layer of lies are concocted in order to keep filling continuously appearing gaps in logic. I do agree with you when you say that religion is what is in the heart; but it is what is in the heart that manifests itself in what the hands do. No matter how Islam-denying and Hindu-phile you are, you cannot deny, with any objective integrity, that Muslim mosques are elegantly simple, and Hindu temples are generally convoluted, and ugly, however colourful they may be. And yes, God does hear a worshipper's prayer wherever it is offered: the difference is that we are commenting on places of worship specifically so-designed. These places thus reflect the essential thinking and philosophy underlying the respective religions.

What is your explanation for the Dark Ages in Europe, which lasted for more than 600 years? This era came after all the Greek philosophers, Romans, Egyptians and indeed your beloved Byzantium! So, according to you, Muslims used the knowledge of all the preceding cultures, but the Europeans? Why, they must have been what, 'ignorant' of what went before? At least you cannot blame the European Dark Ages on Islam! And why did the Dark Ages end? Remember its ending happened AFTER Islam came, so your point about Islam being an inhibiting factor to progress must be an logical own-goal!

As for 'advances' emanating from the Judaeo-Christian world: tread carefully. It is the same world that gave you the Holocaust, Apartheid, two apocalyptic Nuclear atrocities, the Spanish Inquisition; the genocide of the Mayans, Aztecs, native North Americans, Australian Aborigines; two World Wars which, in the aggregate, resulted in the death of more than 60 million (yes million!) human beings.
(4) 2007-12-25 22:11:58
Colin: Quote

azad, you said: Incidentally, how is it that hugely complex India could not produce anything so beautiful as the Taj Mahal until the Muslims arrived? All Muslim-inspired/influenced Indian architecture/jewelery/art is considerably more elegant than the convoluted Hindu productions. There is something inherently ugly about the appearance of a Hindu temple; whereas look at any mosque in India and you will see both simplicity and elegance.

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder ...

As for the article, trying to claim feats of art or science is 'muslim' is just not right. There are many examples of scientific progress, pieces of art etc being produced by athiests, christians, hindus etc, and these are individual feats, nothing to do with religion at all, and to try and claim otherwise is false, or maybe just a poor attempt at trying to change the perceptions of Islam the majority of the world has of that particular religion.
(5) 2007-12-26 11:52:14
The author or administrator has closed this item for comments.