Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
An Interveiw with Abdolkarim Soroush by Michiel Leezenberg - Enlightenment and Philosophy in Islam

An Interveiw with Abdolkarim Soroush by Michiel Leezenberg - Enlightenment and Philosophy in Islam

Ratings: (0)|Views: 107|Likes:
Published by zostri
Michiel Leezenberg interveiws Abdolkarim Soroush - Enlightenment and Philosophy in Islam
Michiel Leezenberg interveiws Abdolkarim Soroush - Enlightenment and Philosophy in Islam

More info:

Published by: zostri on Sep 25, 2010
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial


Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less





itvw soou:
Enlightenment &Philosophy in Islam
MiChiel leezenBerg
shortcomings in explanations of theEnlightenment that do not pay suffi-cient attention to modern science; andfrom the scientific point of view, theDutch contribution has been minor. Onthe other hand, Spinoza, Erasmus, andother Dutchmen have made importantcontributions to the Enlightenment.I have a personal relationship withSpinoza; I feel a certain similarity inmy fate with that of Spinoza: becauseof some of his unorthodox views, hewas excommunicated, and had to leave his place of birth in Am-sterdam. Of course, Spinoza’s was not a biblical God; I think it isvery unfair, however, to call Spinoza an atheist. Some of his ideasare very relevant to the modern Muslim world: reconciling the reli-gious law with democracy and providing a modern understandingof the state is much like what Spinoza has been doing. What makesSpinoza modern is that he historicizes all prophethood; but hisideas of prophethood are inspired in part by al-Farabi and MosesMaimonides.
Like al-Farabi, Spinoza thinks that philosophy is priorand superior to prophethood: philosophers usually work with theirspeculative or intellectual faculty (
), whereas prophets mainlywork through the imagination; they cast the universal in particularsand symbols and thus make it accessible to the layman. All of thisyou can find in Spinoza, but the roots are in al-Farabi; Maimonidesthinks that prophet Moses is above imagination, but for Spinoza, allprophets are on the same footing.More relevantly, Spinoza thinks that religion is not incompatiblewith democracy. He thinks about religious democracy. He showsthat secularism is neither necessary nor sufficient for a democraticstate. For example, in present-day Turkey, many people think thatsecularism is necessary for a democratic state; elsewhere, peopleseem to think that secularism is sufficient. According to Spinoza,however, you can be a democrat out of a religious motivation andout of religious obligations to spread democracy, to separate pow-ers, and so on.
Perhaps the distinction you make sheds a light on the differencesbetween al-Farabi and Spinoza: you suggest that the Enlighten-ment is not just a matter of political philosophy, but also involves aspecific sense of rationality, and experimental natural science. Al-Farabi sees rationality as superior to revelation, but he does notpropagate democracy, and he does not talk about experimentalscience. Your suggestion that it was his Aristotelianism that blockedthe development of experimental science based on nominalismmight be worth pursuing.
I have done some work on the question of why empirical sciencein the modern sense did not develop in the Islamic world. Thepredominance of Aristotelianism does not explain it, because itdominated European scholasticism as well. Some historians of theEnlightenment argue that most of what we call Enlightenment andmodernity was reaction against the idea of an omnipotent God; inIslam, Sufism rather than science was the reaction: it tried to makeGod a lovable rather than an omnipotent God.
Your critique reminds me of the way in which in the Indian subcon-tinent, Muhammad Iqbal argued that it was Sufism, which he seesas a specifically Persian element in Islam that undermined every-Just prior to Soroush’s departure fromthe Netherlands, Michiel Leezenbergtalked with him about the philosophi-cal origins and dimensions of mo-dernity in the Islamic world. Soroushopened with some of his impressionsof the Dutch public debate on Islam,democracy, and secularism.
Maybe due to recent events, andmaybe due to the media, Islamicidentity has become very centralto Muslims here; nevertheless, theyconsider themselves Dutch citizens. What worried them was thatnewspapers and television are very expressly inimical to Islam andgive a distorted picture. Even Dutch academics, I found, are notvery knowledgeable about both Islamic culture and lands. LocalMuslims want to abide by the law, and want the authorities to re-spect Islam just as much as any other religion, and to do full justiceto secularism, i.e. impartiality towards all religions. In the UnitedStates, where I lived for five years, the whole atmosphere is morereligious. In the Netherlands and France, it is not a very welcomething to be a religious person.
 The Dutch press is not only dominated by a secular outlook, butalso by the slogan that Islam has not yet had an Enlightenment. This has—in part inadvertently—been fed by studies like JonathanIsrael’s
Radical Enlightenment 
(2000), which argue that the Enlight-enment actually started in Holland, and more specifically in the cir-cle around the Dutch philosopher Spinoza. According to this view,the truly radical Enlightenment of the Spinoza circle was expresslyanti-clerical, atheist, materialist, and even feminist, and anti-coloni-alist. What do you think of the idea that the Muslim world at large,or Islam as a religion, has not had this process of Enlightenmentyet?
 There has not been anything corresponding to the Enlightenmentin the European sense in the Islamic world: neither modern phi-losophy, nor modern empirical science, nor the modern notion of freedom. These only gained currency in the nineteenth and earlytwentieth century. I believe, however, that in the early twenty-firstcentury, to blindly follow the eighteenth-century Enlightenmentmay not be defensible anymore. Enlightenment in the Europeansense has its historic specificity that cannot be recreated; a reformin Islamic lands would be by definition different from the EuropeanEnlightenment.According to some historians, the Islamic Enlightenment oc-curred much earlier, but due to historical reasons, it could notcontinue. We cannot say that rationalism or secularism was absentfrom the scene. In theology or
, you have the rationalist andquasi-secular Mu‘tazilites, who relied on reason in coming to knowGod and in moral thinking. Unfortunately the rationalism of theMu‘tazilites was Aristotelian. This was very inauspicious: the Euro-pean Enlightenment is based on a nominalist rationalism, whereasIslamic rationalism was Aristotelian and non-nominalist. MullaSadra’s philosophy, despite its appearance, is totally nominalistic;it might bring a kind of modern Enlightenment.Part of the Enlightenment, of course, is the advancement of mod-ern empirical science, and therefore I have looked at the Enlighten-ment through the spectacles of philosophy and science. There are
Thoughts & Perceptions
Abdolkarim Soroush is one of the mostinfluential religious thinkers to emerge frompost-revolutionary Iran. He is an influentialproponent of 
kalam-e no
or “new theology,which explores new ways of secularismbeyond the politicized and revolutionaryforms of religion that marked the IslamicRevolution. From November 2006 throughSeptember 2007, Soroush stayed in theNetherlands as ISIM Visiting Professorat Free University Amsterdam.

You're Reading a Free Preview

/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->