|
(Arguments critical to religion in general, or specific to monotheism, such as the existence of God, are not dealt with here. This page describes criticism specific to Islam only, looking at either its historical nature or that of its beliefs and practices as well as their consequences.)
Critics of Islam have existed since Islam's formative stages. Early written criticism came from Christians, prior to 1000 CE.[1] Later there appeared criticism from the Muslim world itself, and also from Jewish writers and from ecclesiastical Christians.[2][3][4][5] In the modern era, criticism has come from people both inside and outside Islam, on a wide variety of topics.
Objects of criticism include Islam's intolerance of criticism, attitudes towards perceived heresy and accused heretics, and the treatment accorded to apostates in Islamic law.[6] Another area focuses on the morality of the life of Muhammad, the founder of Islam, both in his public and personal life.[5][7] Issues relating to the authenticity and morality of the Qu'ran, the Islamic holy book, are also discussed by critics.[8][9] Other criticisms focus on the question of human rights in modern Islamic nations, and the treatment of women in Islamic law and practice.[10][11] Recently, Islam's influence on the ability of Muslim immigrants in the West to assimilate has been criticized.[12]
History of criticism of Islam
Early Islam
The earliest surviving written criticisms of Islam are to be found in the writings of Christians, who came under the early dominion of the Islamic Caliphate. One such Christian was John of Damascus (born c. 676), who was familiar with Islam and Arabic. The second chapter of his book, The Fount of Wisdom, titled 'Concerning Heresies' presents a series of discussions between Christians and Muslims. John claimed an Arian monk influenced Muhammad and viewed the Islamic doctrines as nothing more than a hotchpotch culled from the Bible. Writing on the Islam's claim of Abrahamic ancestry, John explained that the Arabs were called "Saracens" because they were "empty of Sarah". They were called "Hagarenes" because they were "the bastard descendants of the slave-girl Hagar".[13] According to John V. Tolan, a Professor of Medieval History, John's biography of Muhammad is based on deliberate distortions of Muslim traditions. [14]
The Hadith (written between 844 and 874) contain accounts of criticism of Islam at the time of Muhammad from the pagan, Jewish and Christian inhabitants of Arabia.
Medieval Islamic world
Over the years there have been several famous Muslim critics and skeptics of Islam from within the Islamic world itself. In tenth and eleventh-century Syria there lived a blind poet called Al-Ma'arri. According to Ibn Warraq, he became well-known for a poetry that was affected by a "pervasive pessimism." He labeled religions in general as "noxious weeds," and said that Islam does not have a monopoly on truth. He had particular contempt for the ulema, writing that:
| “ |
They recite their sacred books, although the fact informs me that these are fiction from first to last. O Reason, thou (alone) speakest the truth. Then perish the fools who forged the religious traditions or interpreted them![2] |
” |
In 1280, the Jewish philosopher Ibn Kammuna criticized Islam in his book Examination of the Three Faiths. He reasoned that incompatibility of sharia with the principles of justice undercuts Muhammad's claims of being a perfect man: "there is no proof that Muhammad attained perfection and the ability to perfect others as claimed."[15] The philosopher thus concluded that people usually convert to Islam from ulterior motives:
| “ |
That is why, to this day we never see anyone converting to Islam unless in terror, or in quest of power, or to avoid heavy taxation, or to escape humiliation, or if taken prisoner, or because of infatuation with a Muslim woman, or for some similar reason. Nor do we see a respected, wealthy, and pious non-Muslim well versed in both his faith and that of Islam, going over to the Islamic faith without some of the aforementioned or similar motives.[3] |
” |
According to Bernard Lewis, just as it is natural for a Muslim to assume that the converts to his religion are attracted by its truth, it is equally natural for the convert's former coreligionists to look for baser motives and Ibn Kammuna's list seems to cover most of such nonreligious motives. [16]
Maimonides, one of the foremost 12th century rabbinical arbiters and philosophers, sees the relation of Islam to Judaism as primarily theoretical. Maimonides has no quarrel with the strict monotheism of Islam, but finds fault with the practical politics of Muslim regimes. He also considered Islamic ethics and politics to be inferior to their Jewish counterparts. Maimonides criticised what he perceived as the lack of virtue in the way Muslims rule their societies and relate to one another.[4]
Medieval Christendom
-
- Some medieval ecclesiastical writers portrayed Muhammad as possessed by Satan, a "precursor of the Antichrist" or the Antichrist himself.[5]
- Denis the Carthusian wrote two treatises to refute Islam at the request of Nicholas of Cusa, Contra perfidiam Mahometi, et contra multa dicta Sarracenorum libri quattuor and Dialogus disputationis inter Christianum et Sarracenum de lege Christi et contra perfidiam Mahometi.[17]
- The Tultusceptru de libro domni Metobii, an Andalusian manuscript with unknown dating, shows how Muhammad (called Ozim, from Hashim) was tricked by Satan into adulterating an originally pure divine revelation. The story argues God was concerned about the spiritual fate of the Arabs and wanted to correct their derivation from the faith. He then sends an angel to the monk Osius who orders him to preach to the Arabs. Osius however is in ill-health and orders a young monk, Ozim, to carry out the angel's orders instead. Ozim sets out to follow his orders, but gets stopped by an evil angel on the way. The ignorant Ozim believes him to be the same angel that spoke to Osius before. The evil angel modifies and corrupts the original message given to Ozim by Osius, and renames Ozim Muhammad. From this followed the erroneous teachings of Islam, according to the tultusceptrum.[18]
- According to many Christians, the coming of Muhammad was foretold in the Holy Bible. According to the monk Bede this is in Genesis 16:12, which describes Ishmael as "a wild man" whose "hand will be against every man". Bede says about Muhammad: "Now how great is his hand against all and all hands against him; as they impose his authority upon the whole length of Africa and hold both the greater part of Asia and some of Europe, hating and opposing all."[19]
- In 1391 a dialog was believed to have occurred between Byzantine Emperor Manuel II Palaiologos and a Persian scholar in which the Emperor stated:
| “ |
Show me just what Muhammad brought that was new and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached. God is not pleased by blood - and not acting reasonably is contrary to God's nature. Faith is born of the soul, not the body. Whoever would lead someone to faith needs the ability to speak well and to reason properly, without violence and threats... To convince a reasonable soul, one does not need a strong arm, or weapons of any kind, or any other means of threatening a person with death. |
” |
The first sentence of this quotation, when repeated by Pope Benedict XVI in 2006, lead to a series of riots, firebombing of churches and a Fatwa against the life of the Pope (see Pope Benedict XVI Islam controversy).[citation needed]
Late 19th and Early 20th Century Critics of Islam
- See also: Orientalism
During the late 19th and early 20th century, the new methods of Higher criticism were applied to the Qu'ran, claiming that it had a non-divine origin. Ignaz Goldziher and Henri Corbin wrote about the influence of Zoroastrianism, and others wrote on the influence of Judaism, Christianity and Sabianism [20]
Winston Churchill, the British Prime Minister through most of World War 2, was a strong critic of the effects Islam had on its believers. He stated in his 1899 book "The River War" [21]:
| “ |
How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. The effects are apparent in many countries. Improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live. A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement; the next of its dignity and sanctity. The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property, either as a child, a wife, or a concubine, must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men. Thousands become the brave and loyal soldiers of the Queen: all know how to die but the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step; and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science, the science against which it had vainly struggled, the civilisation of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilisation of ancient Rome. |
” |
Contemporary critics of Islam
Notable contemporary critics include:
|
