Islam and Science – The Theologians

December 17, 2017December 13, 2017 Science & Faith

From the nineteenth century, some writers have suggested that the decline of science in Islam was caused by the negative attitude of Muslim theologians. Thus Sachau says, `The fourth century (Islamic calendar) is the turning point in the history of the spirit of Islam. But for al-Ash`ari and al-Ghazali, the Arabs might have been a nation of Galileos, Keplers, and Newtons Speaking about al-Ash`ari, E.G. Browne compared the destructiveness of his influence to that of Jenghiz Khan and Hūlāgū. A similar point of view is adopted by George Sarton, who labels the views of al-Ash`ari and al-Ghazālī as scholasticism, which ‘were obstacles to the progress of science in the Middle Ages. Sarton says that until the sixteenth century, developments in science were taking place both in the East and the West, but after that time Western science began to grow at an accelerated pace, while Eastern civilization remained at a standstill, or even deteriorated. He concludes that the essential difference between East and West is that the latter overcame scholasticism, while the former did not.

It is true that the divergence between Islam and the West in science continued to increase after the sixteenth century, but the assumption that the opposition of theologians to science was the cause of this, cannot be supported. The real causes are both political and economic, as was demonstrated by Ibn Khaldun; the decrease of interest in the rational sciences and the continued interest in the study of the religious sciences are unrelated. The former was a symptom of the economic weakness of the Islamic states and of their decreasing political power. Had there been a need for science and technology, as was the case during the Golden Age of the Islamic Empire, the rational sciences would have continued to progress without interruption. In Islam, there was no single religious authority that controlled the whole educational system, and this left the system free and not dominated by orthodoxy. The rise of scientists and the flourishing of the rational sciences in the Golden Age reflected the prosperity of the empire and its strength, and the large number of mathematicians, astronomers, physicians, engineers and other kinds of scientists was in response to the needs of society and of the empire in that period. It conformed to the law of supply and demand.

It is not our purpose here to defend the theologians. It should be pointed out, however, that the debate which took place between them and the philosophers was not over the rational sciences. From the beginning, the study of mathematics, astronomy, medicine, alchemy and the other sciences was greatly encouraged, and it was mostly undertaken by scholars who were non-philosophers and non-theologians themselves. The Golden Age of science took place at the same time as the debate between theologians and philosophers was taking place. The study of the rational sciences was not affected by such a debate, since the pursuit of these sciences was independent from both the theological and the philosophical studies. To illustrate our statement, let us take the reigns of al-Ma’mun and of al-Mutawakkil. Al-Ma’mun (813-833) was a staunch supporter of the Mu`tazilites and the rational sciences flourished during his reign. Contrary to him, al-Mutawakkil (847-861) was, according to one orientalist, `of the strictest orthodoxy and fanatical in his orthodoxy…’. During his time `the forces of orthodoxy began to gather momentum’, and the orthodox theologians , whose front was led shortly later by al-Ash`arī,put up an organized front against the Muctazilites But, with his `orthodoxy and fanaticism’,, al-Mutawakkil like al-Ma’mun `was a patron of science and scholarship and reopened the Dar al-Hikma, granting it fresh endowments. The best work of translation was done during his reign… He was a generous patron of scientific research… The best work of Dar al-Hikma was done under him, for by that time experience told, and Hunayn was surrounded by well-trained pupils.’